Joint Maintenance Agreement - The Next Generation

Previously on "The Joint Maintenance Agreement," our commissioners cautiously extended the JMA.  The extension was not executed. Enter Starfleet Command. No executions or violations occurred. Dr. Tim "Bones" Steinhauer, and Youth Sports standby Stacey Franklin finally executed the document. The JMA expired on December 31, 2012.

Stardate 90682.78 (January 28, 2013 for all the non trekkies) Captain Kluck (no disrespect, Matt - just going with the theme) announced that the Klingons, a.k.a. School Board would not accept any of the terms as presented.

Bottom line is that there is no Joint Maintenance Agreement for 2013.

P.S. School Board, beware the "Wrath of Khan."

Sports Advisory, JMA, and other goodies

Mt. Lebanon is looking for residents to fill two vacancies on Dave Brumfield's new Sports Advisory Board. There are two at-large positions available. For more information visit Sports Advisory Board vacancies

According to the Monday, January 28, 2013 Discussion Session Agenda, the Joint Maintenance Agreement is up for discussion. The JMA extension expired last month. The big question is "Did the YSA pay up?" The starting time for the Commission Discussion Session is 6:30 PM.

Additionally, a Skateboard Ordinance and a Residential electricity broker will be discussed.

Skateboarding is illegal everywhere in Mt. Lebanon. There is no 21 Club for kids cited for skateboarding.

I have been asking the Commission for two years now if residents could get a group rate from an electricity broker. It can be done, but turf and deer management have been higher priorities. We could save money on our electric bills instead of constantly shopping for electricity suppliers.

Also planned is a review of the President/Vice President selection process. A heads up. There is no rotation, except Vice President to President. See Something is up UPDATED

Don't leave at the end of the Discussion Session. More fun is planned at the Commission meeting. The agenda includes a proposal to direct the proper municipal officials to solicit proposals and conduct two deer surveys in 2013; the first to be conducted in February, or as early as possible, and the second to be conducted in November. See Something is up UPDATED concerning deer.

Right-to-work...right-to-play

I was reading about Michigan's right-to-work law that was passed and started to think about Mt. Lebanon's future.

Let me back up. Wikipedia defines right-to-work laws as:

A right-to-work law is a statute in the United States of America that prohibits union security agreements, or agreements between labor unions and employers that govern the extent to which an established union can require employees' membership, payment of union dues, or fees as a condition of employment, either before or after hiring. "Right-to-work" laws do not, as the short phrase might suggest, aim to provide a general guarantee of employment to people seeking work, but rather are a government regulation of the contractual agreements between employers and labor unions that prevents them from excluding non-union workers.

KDKA reports that Pennsylvania could follow.  Could Pennsylvania Be Next For Right To Work Legislation?  Local unions are on alert, according to KDKA.

What would that mean to Mt. Lebanon?  It has been said that the MTL school board is cheerleading for the unions. I don't know if that is necessarily true, but it occurred to me that the YSA, for all intents and purposes, has unionized the ball fields in Mt. Lebanon. In effect, the new Sports Advisory Board is representing groups which are required to pay "dues"  to use school district facilities. The municipality collects no money for use of fields. Isn't that essentially what the Joint Maintenance Agreement is? It was initially an agreement to maintain school district fields. The YSA controls ALL fields for its members, in essence, the right-to -play. By the way, what is the status of the Joint Maintenance Agreement?

District/Municipal Collaboration

Wow! I can't believe it.  Both the President's November Report and the Superintendent's November Report have been posted on the School District website. I didn't have to remind them.  Just a little background, both reports were about six months behind on the website. While Dr. Steinhauer was blogging about fortune cookies and construction, his monthly board reports were MIA. Mrs. Posti decided to reprint her board reports on her unofficial blog instead of keeping them official on the website.  Nice to see some improvement.

By reading Posti's report from last night's meeting, I see that she is taking a more cooperative stand with the municipality.

Later this month, the Commission will be taking action on developing a new ad hoc committee designed to review Mt. Lebanon’s available fields as well as the needs that the various local athletic organizations have for field space. This committee will be made up of representatives from the Municipality, each of the field sport organizations as well as representatives from the District. Should this committee’s development be approved by the Commission, I’ve asked Mr. Grogan, Mr. Marciniak and Mr. Kubit to serve on the committee.

This is just one of the many ways the two local taxing bodies work together on a regular basis to realize cost efficiencies, share resources and provide support to each other. In addition to this committee, representatives from both taxing bodies serve on our Strategic Planning Committee, the Municipality’s Comprehensive Planning Committee, the Environmental Sustainability Board, our Safety and Security Committee and the Municipality’s Economic Development Council. Our staff work together to coordinate field maintenance, fuel purchase, winter maintenance, photocopying and printing, interoffice mail delivery, fire safety, police and fire training, pedestrian safety, drivers training, contracted services, recreation, parking and communication. We also work together on programs like School in the Park and Arts in the Park regularly and have realized cost efficiencies for things like joint elevator maintenance in the past when it was cost-efficient to do so.

Additional areas of potential cooperation might include contracting District employees for things like HVAC and Building Automation controls, janitorial services, shared purchasing and fleet management. As contracts are renegotiated in future years, these opportunities and others might be explored. We’ve worked with the Municipality over the years to realize cost and service efficiencies that benefit our residents and are grateful for such a collaborative relationship with their employees and elected officials.

Josephine Posti forgot to mention how she had cheerfully invited the commissioners to the school board community coffees rather than having a Joint Discussion Session.  She is much too busy and requires an agenda to determine if it is worth her time.  Josephine also failed to bring up how difficult it has been for the commissioners to discuss the Joint Maintenance Agreement with the board members.

Joint Maintenance Agreement for 2013

Last night was a bad night for me at the Commission meeting. During the Discussion Session, John Bendel wants to look at using the Rec Bond for turfing fields, including looking at turfing Mellon - again. He wants to study this some more. Why he won't take as much time over deer culling is beyond me. 

The usual sports people were there to speak about turf.  I had to save my minutes for deer culling, so I never even addressed turfing a school district field, let alone any Mt. Lebanon field. The sports people supported the YSA proposal and dissed the Robb Hollow plan.  Only problem with supporting the YSA plan is that their days may be numbered.

Dave Brumfield made three recommendations for the next Joint Maintenance Agreement.

• Negotiate a longer term
• Have individual groups who want field preferences sign the JMA separately
• Draw up guidelines for using fields.  Include field use rules.

If anyone has any other suggestions, I am sure the Commission would welcome them.

Another one bites the dust

I understand that Aqua Club has dropped out of YSA. Smart move. YSA only cares about fields, as far as I am concerned. What about Ice Hockey? Are they in YSA? Or is that another group ready to jump ship? So much for the YSA proposal for Middle and Wildcat Fields.

I see that Tuesday's Commission Discussion Session agenda has been published. Let me guess. Update on Robb Hollow athletic field proposal will probably turn into a discussion about artificial turf. Fifteen minutes has been allotted for the discussion.

A related topic on the agenda is the Joint Maintenance Agreement. Discussion of joint maintenance agreement. Fifteen minutes for this one too. Hey, maybe the school board directors allocated a couple of minutes of their ever popular community coffees to some commissioners so that they could discuss the JMA. With groups dropping out of YSA, I don't see how MTLSD is going to be able to collect from YSA. Maybe a lawsuit is in order. That always seems to be SOP when things don't sit well with the school board.

Posti too busy for Commission

At last week's Commission discussion meeting, Joint Discussion Meetings was an agenda item. Evidently, the Commission has been trying to set up another meeting between the School Board and the Commission to discuss, among other things, the Joint Maintenance Agreement. Remember that fateful night when Josephine Posti said that I have hate in my heart, so she was praying for me? Apology to Josephine Posti That meeting included Dave Brumfield, Kristen Linfante, Steve Feller, Elaine Cappucci, and Josephine Posti.  There has not been another meeting since February 28.

In Citizens' Comments, I expressed my feelings and thanked Dave and Kristen for all the abuse they were getting from Josephine Posti. It was revealed during the Discussion Session that Josephine wanted to see an agenda before she would commit to another meeting. I had said that if the Commission felt that they should have another meeting, then they should have a meeting. This time, the Commission wanted to have a public meeting with as many Commissioners and School Board Directors present, as possible.

In so many words, Josephine blew off the Commission. So I filed a Right To Know on September 13, 2012, asking for all communication between the Commission and School Board Directors concerning joint meetings between Municipal and School Board representatives. 

Here it is. Not only is she much too busy for any meetings, but Josephine also encouraged the Commissioners to attend the School Board coffees along with the rest of us.
Joint Discussion Communication

Joint Maintenance Agreement Approved 4-1

Last night's podcasts have been uploaded on to Lebocitizens.com. The end of Part 1 of the Discussion Session includes the JMA. I believe all of the commissioners asked Staff questions about the Joint Maintenance Agreement. Dave Donnellan emailed all the sports groups, Dr. Steinhauer, and Jan Klein in March asking about the Joint Maintenance Agreement.  He never heard back. On June 6, Jan Klein contacted Dave Donnellan to say that the YSA was not sure if they could move forward as an organization. There were two meetings held since then, June 26 and July 18. Last week, Klein got back to Donnellan to verify that the YSA and School District came to an agreement. The Commission did not get any information about the JMA until Friday when they received their packets.

During last night's discussion, Kristen Linfante, school board liaison, revealed that she was in touch with Elaine Cappucci, Commission liaison, to say that the School District was more concerned with maintaining the field maintenance rather than the YSA portion of the agreement. Kristen also said that we are the only municipality that requires sports groups to pay to use the fields. She wonders if the School District should even charge them at all. I guess that is a preview of coming attractions. Of course.

Kelly Fraasch and Matt Kluck asked to table the vote, but were outvoted. In the end, Kelly said that she would approve this six month extension only. Six months gives the municipality the ability to get out of the fiscal year with being reimbursed for the work that was budgeted for 2012. Six months gives all parties involved to decide to continue the JMA or to go with user fees. Six months also gives the YSA time to decide if they will continue as an organization. Matt Kluck was the only commissioner to oppose the six month agreement.

Wait a second!!!

Looking at the newly posted agenda for Monday's Commission meeting, I see the following action item:

Consideration of a Joint Maintenance Agreement with the Mt. Lebanon School District, Municipality of Mt. Lebanon and the Youth Sports Alliance of Mt. Lebanon.

A joint maintenance agreement has been in place for the past 12 years for field turf maintenance of athletic fields on school district property. The agreement expired on June 30, 2012.

The successor agreement is for a six-month period, and the payments shall be in four monthly installments of $8,925 totaling $35,700. The price has been adjusted due to the temporary elimination of two of the 14 original school fields during construction at the high school.

Recommended Action: Move to authorize the proper municipal officials to sign the agreement.

This was never a discussion item. How could the commissioners be voting on this, in light of all the confusion over payments by the YSA? The school district has more homework to do before they try to jam this down the commissioners' throats.  When will the YSA clean up their arrearages? Why is this successor agreement for six months? How was $35,700 calculated? Show us the math. The school board just approved this on Monday. When did it show up in the commissioners' packets? Who put this on the agenda? Mr. President, did you? Dave, please tell me how you plan to vote and WHY??? Folks, contact the commissioners at commission@mtlebanon.org and ask them how they plan to vote, and more importantly WHY.

YSA is costing the kids $7,000 UPDATED

At Monday's meeting, the Board approved the Joint Maintenance Agreement extension even though the agreement had expired. At approximately the 38.5 minute mark on the podcast, during "Comments from Residents and Taxpayers Concerning Action Items for This Meeting," David Huston urged the Board not to approve the following:

Joint Maintenance Agreement Amendment: RESOLVED, That the Amendment to the Joint Maintenance Agreement dated as of July 1, 2010 is amended in the form presented, and the Superintendent is authorized to execute such Amendment on behalf of the District.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Joint Maintenance Agreement between the District, the Municipality and the Youth Sports Alliance is extended for a period of six months, through December 31, 2012, with the District paying $35,700 to the Municipality for services similar to those provided previously, and the Youth Sports Alliance paying between $10,000 and $11,000 to the District (based on the number of participating children), and with other terms and schedules to be specified in an Extension Agreement acceptable to the Superintendent and the Solicitor, and to be signed by the Superintendent.

David gave the following reasons:

• The amendment is for an expired agreement.
• The Municipality is not a party to this agreement.
• The YSA's "contribution" is being reduced from $30,000 to $23,000.
• The Board is catering to the YSA's payment schedule, so that it is convenient for YSA.

Listen to Tom Peterson's explanation. I have not been able to provide an audio clip of this portion of the meeting, so tune in at the 38.5 minute mark of the podcast. Of course, Timmy was grateful for the YSA. Jan Klein also spoke. Josephine chimed in to say that since the YSA is made up of volunteers with turnover of officers, discrepancies could occur. The relationship is a collaboration, so the District will not come down on them punitively. The Board wants to work creatively with YSA so that they (the YSA) can continue to do good for our children.

The discussion resumed at the time of the vote. See 01:10:48 of the podcast. By reducing the YSA's contribution by $7,000, the taxpayers (or the students) will take the hit since there will be less revenue collected. Mary Birks needed help with that. We cut staff so that we could reduce costs, but since the YSA is collaborating with the School District and they do good for our children, it is OK to reduce their "contribution" by $7,000. The vote was unanimous.

Update August 21, 2012 9:30 AM Audio clip of both parts of the YSA discussion.

Can they do this?

The School District has posted their agenda for this Monday's meeting.

(6) Joint Maintenance Agreement Amendment: RESOLVED, That the Amendment to the Joint Maintenance Agreement dated as of July 1, 2010 is amended in the form presented, and the Superintendent is authorized to execute such Amendment on behalf of the District.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Joint Maintenance Agreement between the District, the Municipality and the Youth Sports Alliance is extended for a period of six months, through December 31, 2012, with the District paying $35,700 to the Municipality for services similar to those provided previously, and the Youth Sports

Alliance paying between $10,000 and $11,000 to the District (based on the number of participating children), and with other terms and schedules to be specified in an Extension Agreement acceptable to the Superintendent and the Solicitor, and to be signed by the Superintendent.

Has the Municipality signed off on this? I thought there were a gazillion kids involved in Youth Sports. Now YSA will be paying based on the number of participating children? Gee, they (meaning both MTLSD and YSA) can't account for YSA payments, how will they keep track of the number of kids? And our super Super is signing this? The man who lies at meetings? At least they are now calling it by its proper name, Joint Maintenance Agreement. Can the District get a discount on multiple orange jumpsuits? Any extra large ones for the Commissioners? Oh, this really stinks.

School Board Agenda Part 4...Joint "Field" Agreement

There is too much going on with the August 13 agenda to have it all in one post, so I thought I would break it up into parts. Here's Part 4....Joint "Field" Agreement.

Joint Field Agreement Revision and Extension with Municipality and YSA – The Municipality and the YSA have been in discussion with the District concerning revision of the current agreement to account for fewer fields in play as a result of the construction at the high school. Also in discussion is the possible extension of the Joint Field Agreement for a six month period through the end of this calendar year recognizing that there are fewer fields for the youth sport groups to use. The proposed changes will be reviewed with the Board at the meeting.

First of all, it is the Joint Maintenance Agreement, not Joint Field Agreement. Extending the agreement for a six month period, as I interpret it, means extending the expired contract six more months. I am confused by their logic. If there are fewer fields for the youth sports groups to use, why are we extending it? And what about that minor detail called the $30,000 fee?

A closer look at the JMA, YSA, MTL, MTLSD, MTLH, MLAC, TBDC,and any other letters of the alphabet

Fascinating information is pouring in about these groups. I received this link from the July/August 2002 issue of mtl Magazine.  See pages 30 and 31 about fields and YSA. http://ebooks.mtlebanon.org/mtl/mtl-072002/files/31.html  There was talk about turfing Jefferson from the time Smartchan was superintendent ten years ago.  The JMA earned the PASBO (PA Association of School Board Officials) award of achievement, but it doesn't look like PASBO ever reviewed the 990 forms.  According to the article, drainage was already rectified. Lots of interesting information, including The Blue Devil Club and Marcia Taylor's involvement.

I also received more 990's. The Mt. Lebanon Aqua Club does a fiscal year, only their fiscal year is from 1 September to 31 August of the following year. Here are their 990's.
Mt. Lebanon Aqua Club 2008 990
Mt. Lebanon Aqua Club 2009 990
Mt. Lebanon Aqua Club 2010 990

The Mt. Lebanon Hockey Association also reports on a fiscal year basis starting 1 May and ending 30 April the following year. Here are their 990's.
Mt. Lebanon Hockey Association 2009 990
Mt. Lebanon Hockey Association 2010 990
Mt. Lebanon Hockey Association 2011 990

I'm intrigued with all these non-profit groups in Mt. Lebanon - especially the field sports groups.  No one group has $200,000 to contribute towards this scheme to carpet and light Wildcat/Middle fields.  The Soccer Association comes close, with net assets of $179,687 - and MLAC has $131,592.  YSA certainly can't come up with the $200K by themselves - they only have a net worth of $31,918!  They must be counting on contributions from other field sports groups to bring $200,000 to the table.

Another Country Heard From UPDATED

By now, you have received your 2012 letter from The Blue Devil Club. I am glad to see that they took some time to draft a new letter.  It is interesting to compare this year's to last year's letter. The 2011 letter "pitched":

• However, this continued success is even more impressive when you consider that our student-athletes also maintained a collective QPA in excess of 3.25!

• Over 91% of the total funds raised by and through the Blue Devil Club are spent specifically on the student-athletes.

 I hope it was an oversight, but those two statements would be worth repeating if they were true this year. In light of the Joint Maintenance Agreement, sports groups' 990's and the YSA, perhaps over 91% of the total funds were not spent on the "student-athletes." The 2011 letter also mentioned that:

ln the past, the funds were spent to upgrade athletic facilities and/or equipment, assist the Club‘s member sport teams meet temporary shortfalls in their ability to raise the funds necessary to meet annual expenditures, and to provide the “extra things” that help give our student-athletes a first class experience that they will never forget!

What annual expenditures? The YSA's inability to contribute $30,000 a year to maintain School District fields? Zero dollars are spent on Municipal fields. Yet, in the YSA's own words, the best baseball fields are Middle and Wildcat which happen to be Municipal fields. When will the Mt. Lebanon Scholastic Athletic Association, a.k.a. The Blue Devil Club, which includes the following varsity sports: baseball, boys' and girls' basketball, cheerleading, football, boys' and girls' soccer, fast pitch softball, boys' and girls' tennis, softball, volleyball and wrestling start contributing to the municipality for the use of their facilities? Why must the 78% of the households who do not have children in school be expected to fund this organization? Levels of support range from an individual or family membership ($25) to Blue Devil Champion ($1000 or more).

Update July 31, 2012 11:15 PM
Blue Devil Club 2009 990
Blue Devil Club 2010 990
Blue Devil Club 2011 990

Yet another "story" about YSA's contributions

Remember what Jan Klein wrote to Richard Gideon in this post, YSA vs. MTLSD - Updated? Remember the YSA 990's that I linked to in the same post?

Then we have the Trib reporting in my post, NSF YSA Makes The Trib!

Then-school Superintendent George Wilson dismissed the amount owed in 2008 because of the group's insufficient funds; and the organization paid the $20,000 balance for 2010 last year.

Now we have Dr. Steinhauer reporting that the Joint Maintenance Agreement has served us well. In fact, the YSA had paid $30,000 in 2008.  Huh? Listen for yourself on the podcast.  It starts at approximately the 58 minute mark. June 11, 2012 School Board Meeting

How many more versions of the story are out there?  Someone is lying to someone somewhere!!!

I do want to thank those school board members who questioned Jan Klein and Dr. Steinhauer. It is appalling how we can't get a straight answer.

NSF YSA Makes The Trib!

In today's Trib, Matt Santoni submitted Mt. Lebanon youth sports backers catch up on bills.

The municipality has been weighing whether to build more athletic fields or improve some existing ones with new drainage or artificial turf, and the YSA is working on some proposals of its own, said commission President Dave Brumfield. Meanwhile, the agreement is being renegotiated to reflect that teams have two fewer fields to use because of construction at the high school.

The YSA was supposed to come up with a plan at the end of April as announced at the April 19 "Town Hall Meeting." Then they were supposed to come up with a plan at the end of May. Do you think they will come up with their infamous plan on Monday evening at 6:30?

The whole Joint Maintenance Agreement is a farce. We have a sports association which doesn't seem to have a very good track record. The School District, from what I heard last night, can't trim the weeds and eliminate the poison ivy that is taking over the steps at Jefferson. And we have Jan Klein/Board bartering with our tax dollars.

Before they go away...

Before I delete the three polls regarding the Joint Maintenance Agreement I had on this blog, I thought I would record the final results in a post.

Based on the documentation provided on this blog, do you feel that the Municipality has been a responsible partner in the Joint Maintenance Agreement?
No 24 (51%)
Yes 23 (48%)

Based on the documentation provided on this blog, do you feel that the Shool District has been a responsible partner in the Joint Maintenance Agreement?
No 33 (70%)
Yes 14 (29%)

Based on the documentation provided on this blog, do you feel that the Youth Sports Alliance (YSA) has been a responsible partner in the Joint Maintenance Agreement?
No 39 (61%)
Yes 24 (38%)

Thanks to all who voted.

What's in it for the Municipality?

Continuing the Joint Maintenance Agreement (JMA) thread, I started a new poll here on Lebo Citizens.  I have been questioning the Municipality's involvement in the JMA. What IS in it for the Municipality? Why should the Municipality be concerned with School District fields? The agreement has not changed since 1999.  The District fee has been $83,300 since Day 1. The YSA claims to have an increase in participants.  Why are they being charged $30,000 each year if field use has increased? They are wearing out the fields, based on their own reports. As it stands, the School District has been bank rolling the YSA during their "lean years." Recently, the District has been looking at various sports and clubs as possible cuts in the budget. Scott Goldman and Dan Remely voted for eliminating hockey and crew from their budget, while others have compromised with a $3000 reduction in the budget.

The District would be able to control costs, in my opinion, if they did their own maintenance. Perhaps each school would be responsible for their own fields. I had suggested for different sports groups to adopt their own field, but that idea didn't seem to fly with some folks.

I have been trying to come up with a list of pros and cons for the Municipality's involvement in the JMA partnership.  I haven't been able to come up with any positive points. If anything, it muddies the waters. If the Municipality got out of the District landscaping business, that would create a clear division when it comes to signage revenue.  The District is in an agreement with UPMC which permits UPMC to advertise for free within certain conditions. By not renewing the agreement, the Municipality would be free and clear of any sports agreements with UPMC.  They could have their own contract with UPMC and generate income for the Municipality.

I am leaving it up to you, the readers, to come up with any reasons why the Municipality should be in such an agreement. 

More on Youth Sports Alliance...Updated 2x

Four more years of YSA's 990's showed up in my email.  This is much better than what we are looking at from 2008 to January of this year, but they are still in the hole overall from calendar year 2004 to January, 2012.

YSA 990 2004 Statement 1 shows $30,000 contributed towards agreement
YSA 990 2005 Line 43a shows $26,000 contributed towards agreement
YSA 990 2006 Line 43a shows $30,000* contributed towards agreement
YSA 990 2007 Line 43c shows $30,000 contributed towards field maint. & improvements

Since the last batch of YSA 990's didn't all match the school district's numbers, I would be curious to hear what Jan Klein's records show.

From what I understand, YSA was not designated a 501(c)(3) until 2005. There are no detailed public financial records on the YSA prior to 2004.

*Corrected amount. See page 17 of the PDF file YSA 990 2006, "Statement 1 - Form 990, Part II, Line 43 - Other Functional Expenses."

Update May 18, 2012 8:25 a.m.

From: egillen476@aol.com
To: commission@mtlebanon.org, schoolboard@mtlsd.net
Cc: TSteinhauer@mtlsd.net, sfeller@mtlebanon.org, davefranklin4@gmail.com
Subject: Joint Maintenance Agreement
Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 22:42:04 -0400 (EDT)

Dear Commissioners and School Board Directors,

I would like to bring to your attention several posts from the Lebo Citizens blog involving Youth Sports Alliance and the Joint Maintenance Agreement concerning maintenance of school district fields.

http://lebocitizens.blogspot.com/2012/05/closer-look-at-fields.html

http://lebocitizens.blogspot.com/2012/05/i-had-visitor-today.html

http://lebocitizens.blogspot.com/2012/05/ysa-vs-mtlsd.html

http://lebocitizens.blogspot.com/2012/05/more-on-youth-sports-alliance.html

Watching you agonize over cuts at the latest school board meeting, it might make sense to go after the low hanging fruit. Collecting YSA's outstanding payments could help eliminate some tough decisions for you.

Elaine Gillen


Update May 18, 2012 8:46 a.m.  Minutes from the 11-23-09 Commission meeting where Dan Miller asks some tough questions about the Joint Maintenance Agreement.  Note Bill Lewis' comments too!

YSA vs. MTLSD - Updated

The following letter to Lebo Citizens was submitted by reader and frequent commenter Richard Gideon.

YSA vs. MLSD

..by Richard Gideon

Lately there has been a vigorous discussion on this Blog concerning the Youth Sports Alliance (also called the Youth Sports Association in various publications), a 501(c)(3) tax exempt entity, and its commitment to contribute $30,000 a year toward the upkeep of sports fields owned by the Mt. Lebanon School District, but maintained by the Municipality. 

On 1 May 1999, the School District, Municipality and Youth Sports Alliance (YSA) entered into an agreement to improve the quality of athletic fields owned by the School District. That original agreement had been renewed, but is set to expire on 30 June 2012.  According to an earlier post on this Blog, "The School District pays Mt. Lebanon $83,300 per year for both infield renovation work and maintenance of the turf grass athletic fields. The Youth Sports Alliance contributes $30,000 each year to the School District for the services."  But has YSA actually made its stated contributions?  This question was first raised when public information available on the web site GuideStar.org, which publishes IRS 990 forms for 501(c)(3) organizations, seemed to contradict statements made by YSA officials that their organization has kept up its end of the agreement.  GuideStar.org shows the following YSA 990-EZ forms:

YSA 990 2008 Line 28 shows $3597 contributed towards agreement
YSA 990 2009 Line 28 shows $30,000 contributed towards agreement
YSA 990 2010 Line 28 shows $10,000 contributed towards agreement 

Year 2011 is not yet available on GuideStar.org.  

Mr. Chip Dalesandro of YSA paid a personal visit to Elaine Gillen, owner of the Lebo Citizens web site and the Lebo Citizens Blog, on 10 May 2012 and stated that "..all the fees for the joint maintenance agreement are paid in full. They have been paid in full every year."  He advised Ms. Gillen that Jan Klein, Director of Finance for the Mt. Lebanon School District, could verify this information.  I decided to write to Ms. Klein and ask her to verify this statement.  In writing to Ms. Klein I stated that, "I am not part of any organization in Mt. Lebanon that has any connections with either the District or the Municipality.  I am concerned about where my tax dollars are going, and whether my local governments (i.e., the Municipality and the District) are being used for the purposes of advancing the agenda of various, private, organizations; and being used either willingly or not.  I also have a pardonable curiosity about these reporting matters as the result of my profession as a registered Federal Contractor, which requires me to deal with the Department of Defense Financial Accounting System and the Department of the Treasury on a daily basis."  I asked Ms. Klein the following questions:

1) Has YSA contributed $30,000 each year for the years 2008, 2010, and 2011?

      a: If the answer to #1 is yes, is this amount delineated in the District's annual financial statement?

      b: If the answer to #1 is yes, will you provide me with written proof of these payments?

2) If the YSA has NOT made its stated contribution amount for the years 2008, 2010, and 2011, are you accruing that amount in anticipation of payment?

      a: if the answer to #2 is yes, did you disclose that on your annual financial statement?

      b: if the answer to #2 is no, have individuals contributed funds in the name of the YSA sufficient to make up the difference between what YSA reports in filing years 2008 and 2010, such that the total amount credited to YSA is the required $30,000?

In asking these questions I was trying to determine whether there was a discrepancy between what YSA is reporting and what is on the District's books.  Since calendar year 2009 does indeed show that YSA contributed the agreed upon $30,000 it was not at issue.  If the District was showing $30,000 for each year in question I wanted to know if the accounting method was accruing that amount in anticipation of payment - a common technique in business.  I also wanted to leave as much room as possible for the benefit of doubt and honest mistakes, and I did not accuse either the YSA or the District of any shenanigans.  Ms. Klein answered my inquiry on 14 May 2012, in part, as follows:

In response to your questions, we received the following payments from the YSA since December of 2007:

7/27/2009 $30,000

3/10/2010 $10,000

7/27/2012 $30,000*

All of the above amounts have been recorded in our Annual Financial Reports as part of our revenues for the appropriate fiscal year. They are not recorded in a separate line on the report, but rather grouped with other misc income.  Such amounts are subject to annual audit. No additional amounts have been accrued.  No donations from others on behalf of the YSA obligation have been received.

*In a follow-up exchange of messages Ms. Klein wrote that this was, as I suspected, a typo - since this is still May of 2012.  The correct date is 1/27/2012 (27 January 2012).

Noting that the year 2008 was missing (and at first suspecting that 7/27/2012 should have been 7/27/2011) I asked the following question:

Should I then assume, based on your breakdown, that you did not receive any money from YSA in 2008?  They are showing $3597 contributed towards the agreement in that calendar year.  Since your figures are calculated from December, 2007, and your table shows the first payment since that time as being on 27 July 2009, I would like to be sure about this.

Ms. Klein replied, "Those are all of the payments made to the District."  I must admit that I was a little disappointed in this reply, since I felt my follow-up question could have elicited a "yes" or "no" response.

What may be surmised from the preceding discussion is this: 1)The District did not receive a $3597 payment from YSA in 2008 (otherwise their figures would not come out to an even $70,000 for the period of accounting from December, 2007 through 27 January 2012), and 2) there was no contribution made by YSA to the District in 2011, since YSA's 990-EZ forms are based on calendar years, and the last $30,000 payment to the District was made in January of this year.  Since the District has been paying the Municipality the contracted $83,300 per annum for field upkeep the taxpayers have been subsidizing YSA's missing contributions.  

The years 1999 through 2007 are subjects for investigation as well.  I did not ask Ms. Klein about them because I had no 990-EZ evidence to use as the basis for formulating questions.  However, this is something that should be investigated.

I think it is important, at this juncture, to point out that I am not accusing either Ms. Klein or Mr. Dalesandro of any malfeasance.  Ms. Klein was polite and extremely professional in her replies to me.  Mr.  Dalesandro is purported to be an honest man with a heart for kids' sports.  But Mr. Dalesandro is not an accountant and, by his own admission, does not get into the "financials."  What is abundantly clear is that there is a tangled mess of contradictory information concerning the YSA's relationship to the District and the Municipality.  And while it is quite possible all of this "mess" is due to benign neglect, ignorance of the law is no excuse, and it would behoove the YSA, and the District and/or Municipality if necessary, to make corrections to their accounts so that the public may have confidence in what it hears or reads from these sources.


Update May 16, 2012 7:30 a.m. I have been able to obtain a copy of the Joint Maintenance Agreement Extension 

-Elaine