Yesterday, I sent this to the commissioners and cc'ed Steve Feller and Phil Weis:
"Commissioners,
There has been much interest on my blog, Lebo Citizens, in buying a sign for Wildcat Field. Since my son is a graphic designer, can I supply the digital files? What format should they be? Where would I deliver the artwork? Who would be my sales rep? Is there a prorated amount for a sign since the field won't be in use for another month or so? Would your insurance cover vandalism? Elaine Gillen"
So far, I have heard nothing, but I am optimistic. I will let Lebo Citizen readers know when I hear more than crickets. Elaine
With a thunderstorm arriving right now and predictions of storms over the next 3 days, it doesn't look like the crown jewel is going to get any better soon. At least not without a costly change order. Realtors, I'd shut down for a month because you certainly don't have a crown jewel to drive prospective homeowners past. Maybe you could sell them a home in Castle Shannon, Whitehall, Bethel or Baldwin. They're all near Cool Springs which if anything, at least for Bethel and maybe Whitehall, puts money in the public coffers instead of sucking it out.
I was wondering about the sales rep thing myself. Is it someone from the municipality or are we contracting this out to a third party company? I wish more information was disclosed.
Following Elaine's request to move the field sign/turf conversation here from the under the Deer Resistant Plantings topic.
Anonymous said: "Turf was in the works in 2012. Petitions were shared, coaches were meeting together and writing letters to commissioners, etc. http://lebofields.blogspot.com/2012/08/turf-petition.html?m=1 May 16, 2015 at 12:19 PM"
I suppose this is their case for field sign revenue being directed specifically for turf.
Irregardless, I suppose if we accept 12:19's comment, we need to resign ourselves to the fact that writing to commissioners, speaking at meetings, signing petitions are a waste of time. 12:19 has told us turf was in the works in 2012.
"Some residents in Mt. Lebanon oppose artificial turf June 26, 2014 11:16 AM By Deana Carpenter"
"The possible installation of artificial turf at two Mt. Lebanon fields took up the majority of the board of commissioners’ meeting Monday night, with about 35 residents speaking for nearly three hours. Most were opposed to putting the turf on Wildcat and Middle fields in Mt. Lebanon’s Main Park."
Sorry folks, but 12:19 just gave you the big middle finger and told you you wasted 3 hours at the commission meeting in June and demonstrating at the field in October.
Now we can roll over and play dead as they expect, or we can start figuring out who was behind that 2012 decision on turf and beginning weeding them out of control.
More finger flying from the sports people. Elaine politely ask everyone to move the field sign dialogue to the Forward topic and what does 2:30 do -- 'FU Elaine, I post what I want, when I want and where I want on your blog.
Here's what they submitted. "AnonymousMay 16, 2015 at 2:30 PM Wake up, folks. You can't have your cake and eat it too. The Baseball Association and the Softball Association spend countless dollars on supplies to maintain MUNICIPAL fields. They spend countless hours on maintenance, because the municipality does little more than mow the grass. They've spent money to build shelters, put in new scoreboards, paint and repair the concessions stand, replace and repair the batting cages, and the list goes on. You complain about accounting, but you want the associations to sell these signs and do all the legwork. If you want to do some accounting, that's great and the associations should send the municipality a big, fat, INVOICE. Knock off the crap about Brafferton, you already know where those bids came in--and what about those neighbors and the lack of parking??? The challenges are even more defined for that field. And it does get used. You all need to wake up! This town isn't just yours."
I'll agree with them that the associations try to do a lot to maintain the fields, but why are they going after taxpayers? Doesn't the problem of poor conditions fall in the Municipal Manager, Public Works, and Rec Dept laps? It's not like they aren't well compensated and we don't pay enough in taxes!
Then they write that we want them to sell these signs. When did anyone say they wanted the sports people selling signs?
Then they talk about Brafferton. What happen to Bird Park Field?
Did people not lobby for new fields at Robb Hollow?
You need to wake up 2:30 and learn to work with people. Maybe if you feel that unappreciated, you should step aside.
Don't 12:19's and 2:30's comments sound similar to those from people that were highly critical of, and accusing people that posted anonymously on this blog as being spineless chickens? Yet here they are, posting anonymously. Since they're are obviously closely aligned with youth baseball and softball they'd better watch out. Dave Franklin doesn't take seriously anything written by anonymous people. So I guess on Dave's advice we can ignore their comments too.
12:19 here. I'm against the turf. I was pointing out that these sporty commissioners were planning for turf for a long time. Ironically, they aren't team players or builders themselves. This is why it's been at least 3 years and we still haven't seen their coveted turf. The sign revenue... who knows where that will go.
7:21, do you think we as the taxpayers that paid for the fences and fields that those advertising will be be displayed on have a right to know where the sign revenue goes? I agree with you that the turf has been planned for for a long time. I believe McNeilly was purchased with turf in mind too. For one, I'm not dead set against the field signs. I'm not crazy about them, but now that the ordinance has been passed I can live with the decision to allow them. If the money is spread around for parks and recreational facilities and not to satisfy specific sports groups desires. In other words, let's have transparent conversations on how the sign revenue is spent. I'd say 2:30's baseball and softball contributions have been well paid back when the commissioners OK'd $875,000 in undesignated tax money towards artificial turf.
3:51, why don't you lead by example and sign your name? Ironic that you hurl an accusation while being anonymous yourself. But I expect that from many on this blog. The point is, that you condemn certain groups, but refuse to acknowledge true facts. The fact is that volunteers are selling the signs. So, if the volunteers from one of these associations are donating their time and energy to sell a sign, that revenue should go to the association they represent to pay for all the supplies and such used by the municipality, or whatever they want to use it on. Unless you would prefer a salaried municipal sales rep to be added to the payroll. No one is going after taxpayers, we are all taxpayers!!! Get it??? Do you use every service and facility that your tax dollars support? If the answer is no, then you along with everyone else pays for things you may not use. It is the same in every community. You don't bitch when the evil sports people are covering the majority of the costs to maintain fields, though do you? It is so one-sided that it borders on pathetic. We get it, you didn't want turf. Well, that is over now, so I guess whatever the next battle is that you lose will mean those on the opposite side are the bad people AGAIN. And for the love of all that is sane, Rob Hollow was shot down by the engineers and would not hold a full-sized field. That came from your fave Kelly herself. She said if a full-sized field was put there, there would only be a couple of feet to stand along the edge of the field. BRILLIANT! And the engineer said grass would not grow there, so it would have to be turf. Would that be better for you?
Elaine, I am pretty sure that I read that all revenue would go to the municipality, but I would have to research notes/meetings to be sure. Checks are to be made payable to Mt. Lebanon, so that money is definitely going through the municipality. The forms are on the rec center's web page. My point wasn't that groups are keeping the money, but rather that no one was being paid to make the sales, that the time to sell was being volunteered.
8:40 and 3:51. There is something you two have in common: major frustration. Has it occurred to either of you that no one should have to be arguing about these royally stupid topics? Has it occurred to anyone that Steve Feller is a cruel person with extremely poor management skills and a gutless, dark soul. Mt Lebanon will never, ever, remotely improve with him at the helm.
8:40, once again you have trouble with comprehension. I never said "I" had a problem with anonymous commenters. I never called anyone a chicken or spineless for not signing their name. I merely pointed out that your writings seemed similar to those that did complain and how ironic it is that you now post anonymously. Now then onto the issue of volunteer sign salesman. Who asked for them? How friggin' hard is it to sell a space on field fence? The Rec Dept announces the space is available for signs in the MTL "official" magazine and businesses call them if they want a sign. Oh wait, your little sports cabal, isn't happy that taxpayers are shelling out almost a million dollars for your precious turf, you want more and apparently you want it for yourselves. Thanks for letting the cat out of the bag. Hope taxpayers are following this!
Thank you 8:40 for alerting us all to your little kickback scheme with the municipality.
Here's an online definition of kickback.
noun 1. a percentage of income given to a person in a position of power or influence as payment for having made the income possible: usually considered improper or unethical.
2. a rebate, usually given secretively by a seller to a buyer or to one who influenced the buyer.
People, here is a perfect example of what is going on in our municipality.
8:40 writes: "The fact is that volunteers are selling the signs. So, if the volunteers from one of these associations are donating their time and energy to sell a sign, that revenue should go to the association they represent to pay for all the supplies and such used by the municipality, or whatever they want to use it on.
DOES ANYONE REMEMBER A DISCUSSION ON PRIOR TO THE PASSAGE OF THE SIGN ORDINANCE THAT VOLUNTEERS FROM SPORTS ASSOCIATES WOULD BE SELLING THE SIGNS AND THEN THE REVENUE SHOULD GO TOWARDS SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS FOR THAT ASSOCIATION?
Now according to the PG reporting on the passazge of the sign ordinance here was the justification for it.
"Over the past month, residents have turned out at meetings to discuss the poor state of neighborhood parks and fields and how the municipality is going to pay for improvements. Many of them agree that selling ad space is a way to fund those projects without raising taxes."
SEE THAT? "RESIDENTS TURNED OUT AT MEETING TO DISCUSS THE POOR STATE OF NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND FIELDS." IT DOESN'T SAY THEY TURNED OUT TO DISCUSS MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES FOR SPECIFIC SPORTS ORGANIZATIONS.
Later in the article Brumfield is quoted "Mr. Brumfield, who introduced the ordinance, said each sign could bring in between $1,000 to $5,000 each year, depending on its size. The money collected from advertisers, for example, could help the municipality improve drainage -- a major concern for residents -- at a field every year, he added."
NOTE AGAIN. HE SPECIFICALLY SAYS "THE MONEY COLLECTED FROM ADVERTISERS, FOR EXAMPLE, COULD HELP THE MUNICIPALITY IMPROVE DRAINAGE -- A MAJOR CONCERN FOR RESIDENTS -- AT EVERY FIELD EVERY YEAR."
NOWHERE IN THAT JUSTIFICATION DOES HE MENTION DIRECTING THE SIGN MONEY TO ANY GROUP OR ASSOCIATION FOR THEIR WISHED FOR MATERIALS OR SUPPLIES.
Isn't funny that in a community of 33,000 people 8:40 thinks municipal property and revenue from it is theirs to direct where they specify!
Who gave them the right to dictate anything?
Now commissioners, we have a public admission by someone obviously associated with youth baseball or softball admitting to a kickback scheme evidenced by their admission that volunteers are selling signs.
Perhaps you weren't aware of this, but now is the time for a full investigation. You took an oath to uphold the codes and laws of the municipality and the Commonwealth and it's time to fulfill those commitments to all the constituents you represent. Failing to do that, the obligation falls next on Miller and Smith to see that everything is on the up and up in our municipality.
Quit debating over a couple of potted plants commissioners and get down to important business!!!!!
8:47 I hate to tell u this but the commissioners do not care about cheating, fraud or deceit. U will need help fTom afar to get anything investigated. #beenthere
11:27, you don't say whether you are 8:40 or not so I'll admit in advance to making an assumption that you are one and the same.
You write at 11:27: "My point wasn't that groups are keeping the money, but rather that no one was being paid to make the sales, that the time to sell was being volunteered."
At 8:40 you wrote rather vehemently: "The fact is that volunteers are selling the signs. So, if the volunteers from one of these associations are donating their time and energy to sell a sign, that revenue should go to the association they represent to pay for all the supplies and such used by the municipality, or whatever they want to use it on."
Why do you believe YOU and your group should be empowered to direct municipal revenue "[on] whatever they want to use it on"?
Absolutely 9:24! That is why we need to get our butts in gear and elect people to office that do care about cheating, fraud and decent. It is the essence of dealng with every issue in MTL from what to do with potted plants to dealing with dear to keeping our fields in pristine condition.
One online dictionary defines a volunteer as: :a person who voluntarilyundertakes or expresses a willingness to undertake a service: as a :one who enters into military service voluntarily b (1) :one who renders a service or takes part in a transaction while having no legal concern or interest(2) :one who receives a conveyance or transfer of property without giving valuable consideration
8:20, do you think your comment below meets the definition of a volunteer?
"The fact is that volunteers are selling the signs. So, if the volunteers from one of these associations are donating their time and energy to sell a sign, that revenue should go to the association they represent to pay for all the supplies and such used by the municipality, or whatever they want to use it on."
Pay close attention a volunteer is "one who renders a service or takes part in a transaction while having no legal concern or interest."
You may think you deserve some compensation for selling signs but if you expect to direct where the sign revenue is spent you are no longer a volunteer.
Elaine You have really hit a nerve with this blog purchasing a sign. But from what I understand they have THEIR designers, THEIR printers etc so they can control what goes up. Watch as new language is added to only allow established businesses. You know they have two of the "best and brightest" lawyers on their side. Yep...
#1. Their designers, their printers... it's easy to understand why they've sold only 3 signs. #2. Their designers can't follow the specs. Look at the 3 signs already and see how many design elements don't follow the guidelines.
9:42 The municipality makes things up as they go along... they are just roadblocks. They exaggerate their own stupidity, too.
It's highly unlikely that with 3 signs, they actually have a routine. You could learn more about this by talking to Oxford Landscaping, The Saloon and whoever the third sign holder is... But in actuality, couldn't Elaine's blog get more advertising bang for the buck in another way? I can't even read those signs from the road and all the blog needs is a bunch of angry sports parents gossiping about the blog at a baseball game.
10:52 it's not a routine you develop with practice. The specifications for size, background color, type style and size, finiallure all spelled out. A competent high school graphics student could meet the requirements. Somehow the 3 signs already up don't. If they have a required municipal designer and printer they should dismiss them both.
Salena Zito of the Trib ask some good questions that should be asked here.
"On the surface we look like a country with a tired soul, tolerant of poor sportsmanship and mediocrity, completely lacking the wherewithal needed to maintain the faith that our families passed down. Where are the leaders who take on corruption, find ways to rebuild our communities' economic cornerstones, and pass on the tradition of faith in our society?"
With some fairly decent rains on Saturday does any find it funny that Mellon Field, which we are told is in such deplorable condition with major drainage issues, was OK for lacrosse Sunday afternoon. But our Crown Jewel Field is still a quagmire and won't be ready for any games anytime soon!
7. Field Sign Advertising Mr. Donnellan reported that he will be asking the Commission to formally adopt a policy on field sign advertising on February 10. He stated that the Sports Advisory Board’s request to change the signs from aluminum to a softer material was incorporated into the draft policy. He asked for assistance from the associations in marketing the signs once a policy is approved. The funds from the field sign sales will be used for turf replacement. The goal is to sell at least seven signs each year. The sign ordinance currently permits a maximum of ten signs per property.
But here is the only official document I can find on the new formally adopted policy Donnellan asked for above.
2015 MT. LEBANON BALLFIELD SIGN SPONSORSHIP PROGRAM – FINAL - APPROVED FEB. 10, 2015 POLICY OUTLINE OF REQUIREMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR SIGN SPONSORSHIP PURPOSE: The intent of this sign policy is to raise revenue consistent with concepts such as audience maturity; it is not to create a forum for unlimited expression. All funds go directly to the Municipality to pay for maintenance or capital improvements of Municipal fields.
LOCATION(S): Wildcat Field, Middle Field, Dixon Field and/ or future fields. Additional fields and pricing may be added at the discretion of the municipality.
------
I cannot find anything in the policy that specifies that volunteers are authorized to sell field signs, nor are there any specifications that sports associations or volunteers may dictate where or how field sign revenue is disbursed.
Notice too, that this approved sign policy conflicts itself... purposely???
Under PURPOSE, the policy states it's intent is raise revenue and all funds go directly "to the municipality" to pay for maintenance or capital improvements of Municipal Fields. Municpal Fields include Bird and Brafferton.
But in the next paragraph it contradicts itself and points out the only locations are Wildcat, Middle and Dixon and/or future fields.
So here are the smoking guns. With all the attorneys involved why a contradictory policy?
Where did Donellan get permission to enlist volunteers to sell municipal assets and did he lead them on that by volunteering they would have a say in where or how the field sign revenue is spent? If that authorization exist can someone show it to us?
More important... have we been given a subtle notice that field sign revenue will be earmarked for planned future fields?
FYI 8:34. In the policy available in Elaine's comment @ 10:20, it states artwork needs to be in AI (Adobe Illustrator) or .eps format. There is nothing in the policy that stipulates that those files must be created by a designated municipal designer.
10:20 AM the sign policy stipulates that the sign material must be made of a vinyl banner material with grommets....this is a spec for banners and the Zoning Ordinance prohibits banners in Leboland. Look it up !
"The intent of this sign policy is to raise revenue consistent with concepts such as audience maturity".
So is a Saloon sign consistent with the t-ball crowd's maturity? How about the little league crowd? How about any of the kids in the crowd? Or maybe these fields aren't really for kids after all.
If the field sign revenue is intended to pay for maintenance or capital improvements of municipal fields (see recently adopted policy) the revenue isn't going to go very far. Especially, if each volunteer gets the right to dictate where the money from their sales effort goes.
Say baseball/softball "sells" 3 signs. Following 8:20's logic they should get to say where the $2,250 from those signs gets applied. Maybe they want turf at Dixon.
Then Lacrosse "sells" 1 sign. They might want their $750 sign revenue spent on building a roof over the Wildcat/Middle Field bleachers.
Same thing for soccer. They "sell" a couple of signs and want brand new goal nets.
Is this how it's going to work. Every special interest gets to dictate how municipal money gets spent.
What happens if say the Swim Club decides to buy a sign at one of the fields advertising what a great thing joining their club is.
Hey is their a better place to advertise for new members than at a location just below the pool? Seriously, the swim club is open to kids outside of MTL, what better place to reach them than at a travel game held near the pool!
Do they then get to dictate their $750 must be spent on fixing the stairs from the field/fields parking lot up to the pool. That's maintenance/capital improvement at the Crown Jewel.
How about the tennis center. Could they buy a sign to enlist kids to play tennis and have control over the revenue?
Or is it that ONLY the field sports associations like baseball/lacrosse/soccer get in on this sign action to fulfill their little shopping list?
I'm told one of the signs up is for one of Mt. Lebanon's retirement facilities.
What's the audience appropriate message here? "Hey t-ballers, it's never too early to start thinking about where you're going to park your elderly parents?" [sarcasm alert]
Of course they aren't 11:28. I'm wondering if The Saloon got special pricing for a multi-year sign contract and how much it was for? I guess by all rights they should since they contributed to the private money for turf.
Just thinking about your headline for this topic, Elaine. At first, I thought it was in reference to the message on the trash can. But after reading through the comments made here, I'm thinking it applies more to the scene behind the can. That scene is both a political statement on backroom wheeling an dealingx, ineptitude and represents an act of vandalism in my opinion.
Hey, look everyone, it's Dave Franklin! And as usual, he is offering brilliant insight and intelligent discourse. Thanks, Dave. Really, without your input this discussion might have ended on a low note. But you saved it. You're the best.
How many times has old Davy boy told us this blog wasn't worthy of his time or energy. Apparently, he stills reads it and the truth must have hit a nerve.
Leave Dave alone. I am sure the weather has him down in the dumps. I saw the flood warnings for Mt. Lebanon on TV tonight. The first place I thought of was Cedar Blvd.
I emailed David Donnellan the same questions I asked of the commission and Steve Feller. They don't seem to be in much of a hurry to sell signs. Makes me wonder about the Concordia sign. Did they age waiting for a response? I'll pass on the information here when it becomes available. Thanks to those who have offered to contribute. Elaine
Dave, Dave, Dave... Thought you said that you don't waste your time reading this blog? But maybe you should start worrying about more important issues that are headed your way. You went after some soccer Moms and Dads because they felt lied to. Now there are people inside your little bubble that are asking "All the Right Questions". Are you ready to answer them? You might want to take a page from Hillary... Emails and texts are never really gone.
Donnellan says the objective is to sell seven (7) signs per year. There are three fields on Cedar, there's Bird, there's Brafferton and their objective is to sell seven lousy signs to help pay for turf. That's $5,250 annually in revenue. There are approximately 14,000 households in Lebo and I don't know how many business properties. So that means less than 37¢ from each property in taxes would bring in an amount to this stupid sign idea. I think we all could afford that annually! I believe this isn't about improving fields, but as 8:20 so well pointed out, a money grab for their special associations wish list. If we all paid the 37¢ in extra tax annually they 8:20's "volunteers" couldn't dictate what the money is spent on.
I wonder as real estate agents drive prospective home buyers past the muddy crown jewel, the mess at Robb Hollow, the HS rock pile, the vacant land at Washington & Bower Hill, Castle Shannon & MTL Blvds, down off Sleepy Hollow and at the end of Country Club, and near St. Clair Hospital and the empty Mmmm-Mmmm Pizza on Castle Shannon- if they get many prospective buyers commenting that this place looks like an abandoned mining town or some reiteration of the Hill District.
If I ran the zoo, McGrew, I'd focus less on keeping the sports associations happy and killing deer and more on developing tax revenue generating properties. Then we wouldn't need to whore out field fences and pan handle for the school district.
But hey , what do I know, I'm not one of those brilliant lawyers or sports association volunteer.
Do you think Franklin's input as a member of the Park Advisory Board and as General Counsel to the Baseball consisted of things like "you folks are hilarious."
May 18@11:21- If banners with grommets defy the zoning ordinance how is it that there's one hanging on the fence by the entrance to Mt. Lebanon cemetery? It's probably less than 100 yards from the zoning dept in the public safety building. Look it up.
7:25, I've been wondering what effect tthe heat rising off that artificial turf will have on lounging around the pool on a hot summer day. One goes to the pool to escape the heat usually, but now you'll be right above a baking field.
58 comments:
That's our "crown jewel!" Nice, too bad those damn deer ate all the plastic grass.
Such a powerful statement. Wow. Maybe there is some deer scat by home plate we could photo and post.
I sense sarcasm, 9:54 AM.
Yesterday, I sent this to the commissioners and cc'ed Steve Feller and Phil Weis:
"Commissioners,
There has been much interest on my blog, Lebo Citizens, in buying a sign for Wildcat Field. Since my son is a graphic designer, can I supply the digital files? What format should they be? Where would I deliver the artwork? Who would be my sales rep? Is there a prorated amount for a sign since the field won't be in use for another month or so? Would your insurance cover vandalism?
Elaine Gillen"
So far, I have heard nothing, but I am optimistic. I will let Lebo Citizen readers know when I hear more than crickets.
Elaine
$750 seems like an exorbitant amount to put up an advertising sign at Wildcat Field.
Can't say I've been there lately, are there large crowds watching weeds grow at our "Crown Jewel?"
With a thunderstorm arriving right now and predictions of storms over the next 3 days, it doesn't look like the crown jewel is going to get any better soon.
At least not without a costly change order.
Realtors, I'd shut down for a month because you certainly don't have a crown jewel to drive prospective homeowners past.
Maybe you could sell them a home in Castle Shannon, Whitehall, Bethel or Baldwin. They're all near Cool Springs which if anything, at least for Bethel and maybe Whitehall, puts money in the public coffers instead of sucking it out.
Forgotten that this was a field for the community, for play, for beauty.
Hi Elaine,
I was wondering about the sales rep thing myself. Is it someone from the municipality or are we contracting this out to a third party company? I wish more information was disclosed.
Nick M.
The monumental community embarrassment and absolute insult to 90% of the residents who will never use it !
Following Elaine's request to move the field sign/turf conversation here from the under the Deer Resistant Plantings topic.
Anonymous said: "Turf was in the works in 2012. Petitions were shared, coaches were meeting together and writing letters to commissioners, etc. http://lebofields.blogspot.com/2012/08/turf-petition.html?m=1
May 16, 2015 at 12:19 PM"
I suppose this is their case for field sign revenue being directed specifically for turf.
Irregardless, I suppose if we accept 12:19's comment, we need to resign ourselves to the fact that writing to commissioners, speaking at meetings, signing petitions are a waste of time. 12:19 has told us turf was in the works in 2012.
So why this in the Post Gazette in June 2014.
http://www.post-gazette.com/local/south/2014/06/26/Some-in-Mt-Lebanon-oppose-artificial-turf/stories/201406260074
"Some residents in Mt. Lebanon oppose artificial turf
June 26, 2014 11:16 AM
By Deana Carpenter"
"The possible installation of artificial turf at two Mt. Lebanon fields took up the majority of the board of commissioners’ meeting Monday night, with about 35 residents speaking for nearly three hours. Most were opposed to putting the turf on Wildcat and Middle fields in Mt. Lebanon’s Main Park."
Sorry folks, but 12:19 just gave you the big middle finger and told you you wasted 3 hours at the commission meeting in June and demonstrating at the field in October.
Now we can roll over and play dead as they expect, or we can start figuring out who was behind that 2012 decision on turf and beginning weeding them out of control.
It is up to us to change things.
More finger flying from the sports people. Elaine politely ask everyone to move the field sign dialogue to the Forward topic and what does 2:30 do -- 'FU Elaine, I post what I want, when I want and where I want on your blog.
Here's what they submitted.
"AnonymousMay 16, 2015 at 2:30 PM
Wake up, folks. You can't have your cake and eat it too. The Baseball Association and the Softball Association spend countless dollars on supplies to maintain MUNICIPAL fields. They spend countless hours on maintenance, because the municipality does little more than mow the grass. They've spent money to build shelters, put in new scoreboards, paint and repair the concessions stand, replace and repair the batting cages, and the list goes on. You complain about accounting, but you want the associations to sell these signs and do all the legwork. If you want to do some accounting, that's great and the associations should send the municipality a big, fat, INVOICE. Knock off the crap about Brafferton, you already know where those bids came in--and what about those neighbors and the lack of parking??? The challenges are even more defined for that field. And it does get used. You all need to wake up! This town isn't just yours."
I'll agree with them that the associations try to do a lot to maintain the fields, but why are they going after taxpayers? Doesn't the problem of poor conditions fall in the Municipal Manager, Public Works, and Rec Dept laps? It's not like they aren't well compensated and we don't pay enough in taxes!
Then they write that we want them to sell these signs. When did anyone say they wanted the sports people selling signs?
Then they talk about Brafferton. What happen to Bird Park Field?
Did people not lobby for new fields at Robb Hollow?
You need to wake up 2:30 and learn to work with people. Maybe if you feel that unappreciated, you should step aside.
Don't 12:19's and 2:30's comments sound similar to those from people that were highly critical of, and accusing people that posted anonymously on this blog as being spineless chickens? Yet here they are, posting anonymously.
Since they're are obviously closely aligned with youth baseball and softball they'd better watch out. Dave Franklin doesn't take seriously anything written by anonymous people. So I guess on Dave's advice we can ignore their comments too.
12:19 here. I'm against the turf. I was pointing out that these sporty commissioners were planning for turf for a long time. Ironically, they aren't team players or builders themselves. This is why it's been at least 3 years and we still haven't seen their coveted turf. The sign revenue... who knows where that will go.
7:21, do you think we as the taxpayers that paid for the fences and fields that those advertising will be be displayed on have a right to know where the sign revenue goes?
I agree with you that the turf has been planned for for a long time. I believe McNeilly was purchased with turf in mind too.
For one, I'm not dead set against the field signs. I'm not crazy about them, but now that the ordinance has been passed I can live with the decision to allow them.
If the money is spread around for parks and recreational facilities and not to satisfy specific sports groups desires.
In other words, let's have transparent conversations on how the sign revenue is spent.
I'd say 2:30's baseball and softball contributions have been well paid back when the commissioners OK'd $875,000 in undesignated tax money towards artificial turf.
3:51, why don't you lead by example and sign your name? Ironic that you hurl an accusation while being anonymous yourself. But I expect that from many on this blog. The point is, that you condemn certain groups, but refuse to acknowledge true facts. The fact is that volunteers are selling the signs. So, if the volunteers from one of these associations are donating their time and energy to sell a sign, that revenue should go to the association they represent to pay for all the supplies and such used by the municipality, or whatever they want to use it on. Unless you would prefer a salaried municipal sales rep to be added to the payroll. No one is going after taxpayers, we are all taxpayers!!! Get it??? Do you use every service and facility that your tax dollars support? If the answer is no, then you along with everyone else pays for things you may not use. It is the same in every community. You don't bitch when the evil sports people are covering the majority of the costs to maintain fields, though do you? It is so one-sided that it borders on pathetic. We get it, you didn't want turf. Well, that is over now, so I guess whatever the next battle is that you lose will mean those on the opposite side are the bad people AGAIN. And for the love of all that is sane, Rob Hollow was shot down by the engineers and would not hold a full-sized field. That came from your fave Kelly herself. She said if a full-sized field was put there, there would only be a couple of feet to stand along the edge of the field. BRILLIANT! And the engineer said grass would not grow there, so it would have to be turf. Would that be better for you?
That mess is the perfect testament to the incompetence of Dave Donnellan and Gateway Engineers.
Has anyone else noticed that "He who shall not be named" has huge signs up for Andy Reinhart? It gives me pause about voting for him.
8:40 PM, so which volunteer's sports association will be getting the revenue from a Lebo Citizens sign?
Elaine
Elaine, I am pretty sure that I read that all revenue would go to the municipality, but I would have to research notes/meetings to be sure. Checks are to be made payable to Mt. Lebanon, so that money is definitely going through the municipality. The forms are on the rec center's web page. My point wasn't that groups are keeping the money, but rather that no one was being paid to make the sales, that the time to sell was being volunteered.
8:40 and 3:51. There is something you two have in common: major frustration. Has it occurred to either of you that no one should have to be arguing about these royally stupid topics? Has it occurred to anyone that Steve Feller is a cruel person with extremely poor management skills and a gutless, dark soul. Mt Lebanon will never, ever, remotely improve with him at the helm.
8:40, once again you have trouble with comprehension.
I never said "I" had a problem with anonymous commenters. I never called anyone a chicken or spineless for not signing their name.
I merely pointed out that your writings seemed similar to those that did complain and how ironic it is that you now post anonymously.
Now then onto the issue of volunteer sign salesman.
Who asked for them?
How friggin' hard is it to sell a space on field fence?
The Rec Dept announces the space is available for signs in the MTL "official" magazine and businesses call them if they want a sign.
Oh wait, your little sports cabal, isn't happy that taxpayers are shelling out almost a million dollars for your precious turf, you want more and apparently you want it for yourselves. Thanks for letting the cat out of the bag.
Hope taxpayers are following this!
Thank you 8:40 for alerting us all to your little kickback scheme with the municipality.
Here's an online definition of kickback.
noun
1. a percentage of income given to a person in a position of power or influence as payment for having made the income possible: usually considered improper or unethical.
2. a rebate, usually given secretively by a seller to a buyer or to one who influenced the buyer.
People, here is a perfect example of what is going on in our municipality.
8:40 writes:
"The fact is that volunteers are selling the signs. So, if the volunteers from one of these associations are donating their time and energy to sell a sign, that revenue should go to the association they represent to pay for all the supplies and such used by the municipality, or whatever they want to use it on.
DOES ANYONE REMEMBER A DISCUSSION ON PRIOR TO THE PASSAGE OF THE SIGN ORDINANCE THAT VOLUNTEERS FROM SPORTS ASSOCIATES WOULD BE SELLING THE SIGNS AND THEN THE REVENUE SHOULD GO TOWARDS SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS FOR THAT ASSOCIATION?
Now according to the PG reporting on the passazge of the sign ordinance here was the justification for it.
http://www.post-gazette.com/local/south/2012/05/10/Advertisements-coming-to-school-municipal-fields-in-Mt-Lebanon/stories/201205100327
"Over the past month, residents have turned out at meetings to discuss the poor state of neighborhood parks and fields and how the municipality is going to pay for improvements. Many of them agree that selling ad space is a way to fund those projects without raising taxes."
SEE THAT? "RESIDENTS TURNED OUT AT MEETING TO DISCUSS THE POOR STATE OF NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND FIELDS."
IT DOESN'T SAY THEY TURNED OUT TO DISCUSS MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES FOR SPECIFIC SPORTS ORGANIZATIONS.
Later in the article Brumfield is quoted "Mr. Brumfield, who introduced the ordinance, said each sign could bring in between $1,000 to $5,000 each year, depending on its size. The money collected from advertisers, for example, could help the municipality improve drainage -- a major concern for residents -- at a field every year, he added."
NOTE AGAIN. HE SPECIFICALLY SAYS "THE MONEY COLLECTED FROM ADVERTISERS, FOR EXAMPLE, COULD HELP THE MUNICIPALITY IMPROVE DRAINAGE -- A MAJOR CONCERN FOR RESIDENTS -- AT EVERY FIELD EVERY YEAR."
NOWHERE IN THAT JUSTIFICATION DOES HE MENTION DIRECTING THE SIGN MONEY TO ANY GROUP OR ASSOCIATION FOR THEIR WISHED FOR MATERIALS OR SUPPLIES.
Isn't funny that in a community of 33,000 people 8:40 thinks municipal property and revenue from it is theirs to direct where they specify!
Who gave them the right to dictate anything?
Now commissioners, we have a public admission by someone obviously associated with youth baseball or softball admitting to a kickback scheme evidenced by their admission that volunteers are selling signs.
Perhaps you weren't aware of this, but now is the time for a full investigation. You took an oath to uphold the codes and laws of the municipality and the Commonwealth and it's time to fulfill those commitments to all the constituents you represent.
Failing to do that, the obligation falls next on Miller and Smith to see that everything is on the up and up in our municipality.
Quit debating over a couple of potted plants commissioners and get down to important business!!!!!
8:47 I hate to tell u this but the commissioners do not care about cheating, fraud or deceit. U will need help fTom afar to get anything investigated. #beenthere
11:27, you don't say whether you are 8:40 or not so I'll admit in advance to making an assumption that you are one and the same.
You write at 11:27: "My point wasn't that groups are keeping the money, but rather that no one was being paid to make the sales, that the time to sell was being volunteered."
At 8:40 you wrote rather vehemently: "The fact is that volunteers are selling the signs. So, if the volunteers from one of these associations are donating their time and energy to sell a sign, that revenue should go to the association they represent to pay for all the supplies and such used by the municipality, or whatever they want to use it on."
Why do you believe YOU and your group should be empowered to direct municipal revenue "[on] whatever they want to use it on"?
Absolutely 9:24! That is why we need to get our butts in gear and elect people to office that do care about cheating, fraud and decent.
It is the essence of dealng with every issue in MTL from what to do with potted plants to dealing with dear to keeping our fields in pristine condition.
One online dictionary defines a volunteer as:
:a person who voluntarilyundertakes or expresses a willingness to undertake a service: as
a :one who enters into military service voluntarily
b (1) :one who renders a service or takes part in a transaction while having no legal concern or interest(2) :one who receives a conveyance or transfer of property without giving valuable consideration
8:20, do you think your comment below meets the definition of a volunteer?
"The fact is that volunteers are selling the signs. So, if the volunteers from one of these associations are donating their time and energy to sell a sign, that revenue should go to the association they represent to pay for all the supplies and such used by the municipality, or whatever they want to use it on."
Pay close attention a volunteer is "one who renders a service or takes part in a transaction while having no legal concern or interest."
You may think you deserve some compensation for selling signs but if you expect to direct where the sign revenue is spent you are no longer a volunteer.
Elaine You have really hit a nerve with this blog purchasing a sign. But from what I understand they have THEIR designers, THEIR printers etc so they can control what goes up. Watch as new language is added to only allow established businesses. You know they have two of the "best and brightest" lawyers on their side. Yep...
Best and brightest 8:34? Who if I may ask would they be?
Nick M.
#1. Their designers, their printers... it's easy to understand why they've sold only 3 signs.
#2. Their designers can't follow the specs. Look at the 3 signs already and see how many design elements don't follow the guidelines.
9:42 The municipality makes things up as they go along... they are just roadblocks. They exaggerate their own stupidity, too.
It's highly unlikely that with 3 signs, they actually have a routine. You could learn more about this by talking to Oxford Landscaping, The Saloon and whoever the third sign holder is... But in actuality, couldn't Elaine's blog get more advertising bang for the buck in another way? I can't even read those signs from the road and all the blog needs is a bunch of angry sports parents gossiping about the blog at a baseball game.
10:52 it's not a routine you develop with practice.
The specifications for size, background color, type style and size, finiallure all spelled out. A competent high school graphics student could meet the requirements.
Somehow the 3 signs already up don't. If they have a required municipal designer and printer they should dismiss them both.
http://triblive.com/mobile/8369329-96/community-guy-politics
Salena Zito of the Trib ask some good questions that should be asked here.
"On the surface we look like a country with a tired soul, tolerant of poor sportsmanship and mediocrity, completely lacking the wherewithal needed to maintain the faith that our families passed down.
Where are the leaders who take on corruption, find ways to rebuild our communities' economic cornerstones, and pass on the tradition of faith in our society?"
With some fairly decent rains on Saturday does any find it funny that Mellon Field, which we are told is in such deplorable condition with major drainage issues, was OK for lacrosse Sunday afternoon.
But our Crown Jewel Field is still a quagmire and won't be ready for any games anytime soon!
Here's where the associations gained control of the field signs.
www.mtlebanon.org/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/2275
7. Field Sign Advertising
Mr. Donnellan reported that he will be asking the Commission to formally adopt a
policy on field sign advertising on February 10. He stated that the Sports
Advisory Board’s request to change the signs from aluminum to a softer material was incorporated into the draft policy. He asked for assistance from the
associations in marketing the signs once a policy is approved.
The funds from the field sign sales will be used for turf replacement. The goal is
to sell at least seven signs each year. The sign ordinance currently permits a
maximum of ten signs per property.
But here is the only official document I can find on the new formally adopted policy Donnellan asked for above.
http://www.mtlebanon.org/DocumentCenter/View/10794
2015 MT. LEBANON BALLFIELD SIGN SPONSORSHIP
PROGRAM – FINAL - APPROVED FEB. 10, 2015
POLICY OUTLINE OF REQUIREMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR SIGN SPONSORSHIP
PURPOSE: The intent of this sign policy is to raise revenue consistent with concepts such as
audience maturity; it is not to create a forum for unlimited expression. All funds go directly to the
Municipality to pay for maintenance or capital improvements of Municipal fields.
LOCATION(S): Wildcat Field, Middle Field, Dixon Field and/ or future fields. Additional fields and
pricing may be added at the discretion of the municipality.
------
I cannot find anything in the policy that specifies that volunteers are authorized to sell field signs, nor are there any specifications that sports associations or volunteers may dictate where or how field sign revenue is disbursed.
Notice too, that this approved sign policy conflicts itself... purposely???
Under PURPOSE, the policy states it's intent is raise revenue and all funds go directly "to the municipality" to pay for maintenance or capital improvements of Municipal Fields. Municpal Fields include Bird and Brafferton.
But in the next paragraph it contradicts itself and points out the only locations are Wildcat, Middle and Dixon and/or future fields.
So here are the smoking guns.
With all the attorneys involved why a contradictory policy?
Where did Donellan get permission to enlist volunteers to sell municipal assets and did he lead them on that by volunteering they would have a say in where or how the field sign revenue is spent?
If that authorization exist can someone show it to us?
More important... have we been given a subtle notice that field sign revenue will be earmarked for planned future fields?
Correction @ 9:30
Here's [possibly] where the associations [might think] they gained control of the field signs.
Steve Feller responded to my email. Here is what he wrote:
"Hi Elaine:
The general information is on the web site at:
http://www.mtlebanon.org/documentcenter/view/10794
David Donnellan and the Rec. Dept. should be your point of contact. Thanks.
Steve"
FYI 8:34.
In the policy available in Elaine's comment @ 10:20, it states artwork needs to be in AI (Adobe Illustrator) or .eps format.
There is nothing in the policy that stipulates that those files must be created by a designated municipal designer.
10:20 AM the sign policy stipulates that the sign material must be made of a vinyl banner material with grommets....this is a spec for banners and the Zoning Ordinance prohibits banners in Leboland. Look it up !
I like this part of the policy:
"The intent of this sign policy is to raise revenue consistent with concepts such as
audience maturity".
So is a Saloon sign consistent with the t-ball crowd's maturity? How about the little league crowd? How about any of the kids in the crowd? Or maybe these fields aren't really for kids after all.
Let's think this whole field sign thing through.
If the field sign revenue is intended to pay for maintenance or capital improvements of municipal fields (see recently adopted policy) the revenue isn't going to go very far.
Especially, if each volunteer gets the right to dictate where the money from their sales effort goes.
Say baseball/softball "sells" 3 signs. Following 8:20's logic they should get to say where the $2,250 from those signs gets applied. Maybe they want turf at Dixon.
Then Lacrosse "sells" 1 sign. They might want their $750 sign revenue spent on building a roof over the Wildcat/Middle Field bleachers.
Same thing for soccer. They "sell" a couple of signs and want brand new goal nets.
Is this how it's going to work. Every special interest gets to dictate how municipal money gets spent.
What happens if say the Swim Club decides to buy a sign at one of the fields advertising what a great thing joining their club is.
Hey is their a better place to advertise for new members than at a location just below the pool? Seriously, the swim club is open to kids outside of MTL, what better place to reach them than at a travel game held near the pool!
Do they then get to dictate their $750 must be spent on fixing the stairs from the field/fields parking lot up to the pool. That's maintenance/capital improvement at the Crown Jewel.
How about the tennis center. Could they buy a sign to enlist kids to play tennis and have control over the revenue?
Or is it that ONLY the field sports associations like baseball/lacrosse/soccer get in on this sign action to fulfill their little shopping list?
11:21 there are banners hanging on the tennis center fences right now.
For years banners have been hung on the front of Blue Ribbon schools.
If banners are against code, no ones been enforcing the restriction (like parking fines) for years.
I'm told one of the signs up is for one of Mt. Lebanon's retirement facilities.
What's the audience appropriate message here?
"Hey t-ballers, it's never too early to start thinking about where you're going to park your elderly parents?" [sarcasm alert]
Of course they aren't 11:28.
I'm wondering if The Saloon got special pricing for a multi-year sign contract and how much it was for?
I guess by all rights they should since they contributed to the private money for turf.
If Donnellan is Elaine's "salesperson" for a sign, which sport gets the benefit of her $750 or does she get to direct its use?
You folks are hilarious.
Dave Franklin
Just thinking about your headline for this topic, Elaine.
At first, I thought it was in reference to the message on the trash can.
But after reading through the comments made here, I'm thinking it applies more to the scene behind the can.
That scene is both a political statement on backroom wheeling an dealingx, ineptitude and represents an act of vandalism in my opinion.
How's that Mr.Franklin, or is this just one more meaningless drive-bys?
Besides,I thought you didn't recognize anonymous post.
A million dollar plus investment in artificial turf and sports associations are crying that they should get more... that is hilarious!
Hey, look everyone, it's Dave Franklin! And as usual, he is offering brilliant insight and intelligent discourse.
Thanks, Dave. Really, without your input this discussion might have ended on a low note. But you saved it. You're the best.
How many times has old Davy boy told us this blog wasn't worthy of his time or energy.
Apparently, he stills reads it and the truth must have hit a nerve.
Leave Dave alone. I am sure the weather has him down in the dumps. I saw the flood warnings for Mt. Lebanon on TV tonight. The first place I thought of was Cedar Blvd.
I emailed David Donnellan the same questions I asked of the commission and Steve Feller. They don't seem to be in much of a hurry to sell signs. Makes me wonder about the Concordia sign. Did they age waiting for a response? I'll pass on the information here when it becomes available. Thanks to those who have offered to contribute.
Elaine
Dave, Dave, Dave... Thought you said that you don't waste your time reading this blog? But maybe you should start worrying about more important issues that are headed your way. You went after some soccer Moms and Dads because they felt lied to. Now there are people inside your little bubble that are asking "All the Right Questions". Are you ready to answer them? You might want to take a page from Hillary... Emails and texts are never really gone.
Mad Mom that's getter madder each and EVERY day!
Donnellan says the objective is to sell seven (7) signs per year.
There are three fields on Cedar, there's Bird, there's Brafferton and their objective is to sell seven lousy signs to help pay for turf. That's $5,250 annually in revenue.
There are approximately 14,000 households in Lebo and I don't know how many business properties.
So that means less than 37¢ from each property in taxes would bring in an amount to this stupid sign idea.
I think we all could afford that annually!
I believe this isn't about improving fields, but as 8:20 so well pointed out, a money grab for their special associations wish list.
If we all paid the 37¢ in extra tax annually they 8:20's "volunteers" couldn't dictate what the money is spent on.
I wonder as real estate agents drive prospective home buyers past the muddy crown jewel, the mess at Robb Hollow, the HS rock pile, the vacant land at Washington & Bower Hill, Castle Shannon & MTL Blvds, down off Sleepy Hollow and at the end of Country Club, and near St. Clair Hospital and the empty Mmmm-Mmmm Pizza on Castle Shannon- if they get many prospective buyers commenting that this place looks like an abandoned mining town or some reiteration of the Hill District.
If I ran the zoo, McGrew, I'd focus less on keeping the sports associations happy and killing deer and more on developing tax revenue generating properties. Then we wouldn't need to whore out field fences and pan handle for the school district.
But hey , what do I know, I'm not one of those brilliant lawyers or sports association volunteer.
Do you think Franklin's input as a member of the Park Advisory Board and as General Counsel to the Baseball consisted of things like "you folks are hilarious."
Just think, as you climb to the top of the slide at the MTL pool you'll be able to view that crown jewel in all its muddy glory.
May 18@11:21-
If banners with grommets defy the zoning ordinance how is it that there's one hanging on the fence by the entrance to Mt. Lebanon cemetery?
It's probably less than 100 yards from the zoning dept in the public safety building.
Look it up.
7:25, I've been wondering what effect tthe heat rising off that artificial turf will have on lounging around the pool on a hot summer day.
One goes to the pool to escape the heat usually, but now you'll be right above a baking field.
Post a Comment