posted by Mike Madison at 8:46 AM /
Over the weekend I received a copy of a "questionnaire" that was sent last week to all candidates for the Mt. Lebanon School Board. I'll excerpt the "questionnaire" below rather than post the whole thing.
The "questionnaire" has a presumptuous "or else" tone that I find pretty amazing. If I were a candidate for the School Board, I would respond by telling this group that they can count on my support when they actually show up with cash in hand, and even then, that the School District may have more important athletic facility priorities than new turf at the high school stadium. How about that swimming pool and locker room area? Why prioritize outdoor athletics or athletics of any kind over arts and other non-athletic programming?
No "public/private partnership" should dictate strategic priorities to the School District, no matter how much money they claim to have - or threaten to withhold.
The "questionnaire" has a presumptuous "or else" tone that I find pretty amazing. If I were a candidate for the School Board, I would respond by telling this group that they can count on my support when they actually show up with cash in hand, and even then, that the School District may have more important athletic facility priorities than new turf at the high school stadium. How about that swimming pool and locker room area? Why prioritize outdoor athletics or athletics of any kind over arts and other non-athletic programming?
No "public/private partnership" should dictate strategic priorities to the School District, no matter how much money they claim to have - or threaten to withhold.
April 9, 2009Updated 4/16 at 5 pm: Way down in the Comments to this post, I volunteered to post an unedited version of the questionnaire if I was asked to. I was asked to. You can find the full document that I received -- with some formatting curiosities that are undoubtedly caused by some OS incompatibilities -- here.
Mt. Lebanon's Field Sports Facilities Partnership
Advocating a private-public joint venture
Board and Candidate Questionnaire
... As you are already aware, our group of concerned Mt. Lebanon taxpayers is prepared to launch, and is wholly dedicated to promoting, a private-public partnership to secure adequate funding for capital improvement projects that will benefit Mt. Lebanon's students and residents. In so doing, our group, comprised of Republicans, Democrats and Independents alike, will shoulder a large portion of the financial responsibility of raising private funds for athletic facility improvements, including the athletic fields, track, field house and stadium-complex, on the campus of Mt. Lebanon High School and, if necessary, other properties within the School District.
As momentum enthusiastically builds during our group's continued organizational efforts, we have, unfortunately, started to detect a notable distrust amongst many private funding sources and Mt. Lebanon residents regarding the School Board's ability to serve as a responsible partner in our proposed joint private-public venture. This is a potentially problematic development since our group's ability to effectively raise private funding will depend heavily upon the assessment of donors who are interested in determining whether Mt. Lebanon's elected officials are committed to the shared vision, and are responsible custodians of the shared financial resources, of this proposed joint initiative.
We have carefully considered how best to address this concern by attempting to identify elected officials and/or candidates who may be counted upon to willingly partner with our group to ensure that whatever public dollars are available for outdoor athletic facility upgrades as part of the pending High School renovation project are identified from the outset and are appropriately applied to realize the collective goal of our private-public collaboration.
Given the foregoing, and in an initial attempt to preliminarily promote our mission, representatives from our group met with all of the candidates running for and currently serving on the School Board (with the exception of two). We did so in the spirit of partnership and with the optimistic hope that our elected officials (and those running for office), who - by virtue of your title - are in the best position to prioritize the co-curricular and extra-curricular needs of our high school students, would share our commitment to this political-neutral initiative.
...
Regrettably, the vast majority of our meetings with Board members and candidates failed to reveal any clear and unequivocal position regarding the issues of most importance to our group at this time. The single most obvious consensus point was that no person was willing and/or able to provide our group a firm commitment regarding a specific action plan related to short-term and long-term steps to bring the outside athletic facilities such as the stadium, field house, etc. up to best-in-class status.
As a result, we now question whether our initial optimism and faith in the School Board as a partner in this joint venture may have been misplaced given its prolonged lack of vision, lack of creativity and inability to build a consensus. To this extent, we remain uncertain as to the School Board's vision and leadership capabilities when it is considering a massive renovation project at the High School without dedicating specific resources to reasonably address the long-neglected needs of our students and residents.
Fearing that nothing may be done for several more decades to timely address the needs of current and future Mt. Lebanon students and residents as it pertains to the dedication of sufficient resources for improved outdoor athletic facilities, our group is now prepared to take ownership of this matter. In so doing, we are exceedingly confident that as the only group within the community that has commenced mobilizing in support of a private-public partnership to address the challenges of the High School renovation project, we are well postured to respond to the needs of Mt. Lebanon's students and residents. To this extent, we are unlike any other group within the community -- we are committed to putting our own skin in the game, in terms of our collective good will, sweat equity AND millions of private equity dollars.
In order to assess whether you may be counted upon to support a private-public funding partnership dedicated to committing financial resources for upgrading the outdoor athletic facilities at the High School and other locations, we encourage you to respond to the following questions. Your responses will afford our group the opportunity to evaluate your formal commitment to both the needs of our students and the community, and your commitment to a position consistent with the mission of our group.
In responding to the following questions, please be advised that we will advise members of our group and residents as to your responses.
1. What is your view of the current condition of the field house, track & field and stadium complex on the campus of Mt. Lebanon High School?
2. Do you believe that it is necessary to address significant upgrading of the outdoor athletic facilities as part of the proposed High School renovation project?
3. If so what is your specific plan (including order of priorities for such upgrades) and how much money do you believe the District should commit to this endeavor in Phase I as part of the overall High School renovation?
4. Separate and apart from how much money the District should commit to this initiative, how much money do you believe the District will ultimately commit as part of the High School renovation project and at what stage (i.e., Phase I) will it be committed?
5. Would you support our group "bridging the gap" between the resources that should be dedicated to address this need and the resources that will be dedicated by the District to address the needs articulated by our group?
6. Are you committed to prioritizing your specific plan while serving on the School Board and, if so, do you believe you are capable of building a consensus to support your plan on the Board?
7. During the past 12 months, the School Board has referred to a two million dollar commitment of funds to upgrade the outdoor athletic facilities at the stadium/field house. At a minimum, will you vote to commit to advance funds from the capital improvement reserve of two million dollars in Phase I of the high school renovation project to address outdoor athletic facility upgrades at the stadium as part of our proposed joint private-public venture?
8. What is your position regarding either renovating or demolishing Building B of the High School? If you are in favor of renovating Building B, what was the basis for your decision both financially and politically?
9. Would you support financially a collaborative project with the municipality regarding immediately turfing the field at Mellon in preparation for the High School renovation project?
10. Do you support re-turfing the high school stadium's field this summer in preparation for Fall sports in 2009?
... Please forward your responses to [the] Mt. Lebanon's Field Sports Facilities Partnership by no later than April 15, 2009. If we do not receive any response from you, we have to assume you are unwilling to commit to the type of private-public partnership that our group envisions.
Thank you for your participation.
Labels: mt. lebanon school district; mt. lebanon school board; athletic facilities
26 Comments:
I support athletics, but I'm not an Athletic Supporter.
WOW ! This smacks like some form of *extortion*, or blatant lobbying, and is outright threatening at the very least. Is this "Partnership" a registered PA non-profit, or are it's youth sports members representing local youth sports nonprofit entities ? If so, I hope they are aware that there are serious legal restrictions on lobbying for legislation and candidates....and the eventual school board votes on the H.S. project and its funding are, I believe, considered legislative acts by the school board. PA nonprofits also have as an ex-officio member of their boards, by law, the State Atty. General, who oversees all PA nonprofits. Maybe the IRS and the State Atty. General should be made aware of all this ?
Incredible.
A Capital Projects effort like this should have started four years ago in cooperation with the Administration. We heard promises like this from the Aqua Club for the swimming pool and one person did give $10,000.
Building the right pool is at least an $8,000,000 project and I would have contributed to it if this was not school board election politics.
Put you money where your mouth is and work with the Superintendent and his staff so the community gets the priorities of professional staff instead of unqualified politicians. If you raise the money call back.
Several years ago, the Municipality asked the youth field sports groups to make a financial contribution towards the remaining $3 million required to develop McNeilly Park into 2 soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockey fields and a baseball field, with stadium seating, concession stand, lavatories and a 200 car paved and lighted parking lot. In fact, the Municipality made it a condition of going forward. The Soccer Foundation initially pledged $125,000 from their sale of real property donated to them, but then cancelled that pledge. After 2 years, there was not one other offer of financial support from any youth sports organization. The McNeilly property will be put up for sale....we taxpayers are paying off the $2 million bond issue floated by the Municipality to pay for it. It is doubtfull that that cost will be fully recovered in a resale; and, subsequent engineering, enviornmental testing & remediation, to-date legal costs, demolition costs and closing costs associated with a resale of the property are basically unrecoverable.
There is a big difference between bending an ear and twisting an arm.
I need to know the identity of the arm-twisters before further comment.
They sure know who I am!
I haven't seen the entire letter and survey (other than what's been posted here) nor do I have personal knowledge about this group or its motives. However, in the interest of full disclosure, I am a big advocate for youth and interscholastic sports in Lebo, which require fields, so their message has some meaning to me and perhaps thousands of other families and residents (many without kids) who use the high school track and field complex.
First, I think the meritless accusations surrounding their activity should probably stop. If this group (collectively or individually) donates money to a candidate then they are subject to the campaign finance laws, as are all of us. I also don't view this activity as “lobbying”, at least as that term is defined under Pennsylvania law. Lobbyists are regulated because they are hired guns. This group is not being paid by someone else to influence our elected officials - they're doing it themselves! In fact, if you read the Intent section of Pennsylvania’s Lobbying Disclosure law, you'll find a statement which reads, “The Constitution of Pennsylvania recognizes that all free governments are founded upon the authority of the people . . . The Constitution guarantees the people the right to petition those invested with the powers of government for redress of grievances.”
And extortion? Come on. Who are we kidding? Special interest groups (some with money and some without) have successfully swayed the outcome of elections and political policy for decades. Should we be surprised that special interest groups have now shown up in our little town with its huge and overburdened budget?
If this group of 1 or 1,000 wants to know the candidates' position on this or any other issue before lending its support @ the polls or in the future, why shouldn't they be allowed to ask? Is this really any different than the recent private meetings involving residents (some with considerable clout) and the school board candidates aimed at understanding (and perhaps influencing) their individual positions on the high school project? Can't I question a candidate about his position on the issues before I give him $50, let him put a sign in my yard or lend him my support both before and after the election? This isn't Russia, is it Danny?
Would it make any difference if a member of this group attended the upcoming "Meet the Candidates" forum and asked these same questions live and in person? If a candidate for public office feels offended, extorted or just a bit out of sorts for having to explain his position on an issue in exchange for my vote, then perhaps, as Chuck Noll used to say, “he should get on with his life’s work” . . . because he shouldn't be running for office.
A lot of the candidate websites that are now linked to this Blog discuss the need for sacrifice in the years ahead. So, is it really that strange for a group that is inclined to contribute its own after-tax dollars to demand some acknowledgement from the other side as to its own level of commitment?
And let's look at it this way - the Mt. Lebanon Foundation for Education and the Community Foundation were both created to tap into the tremendous private resources in this town. The basic message of those two mainstream groups is this: We all understand that there's only so much that our tax dollars can accomplish in this community. Therefore, we will gladly accept your charitable donation, which may be directed into our general fund or earmarked for a specific project that you (the donor) believes to be important (e.g., park benches, trees, sidewalks, the Library or even athletic fields).
With that in mind, if one or a few of these field advocates donated significant money through either one of these accepted entities with the condition that it be spent on field development and maintenance, I’m pretty confident that the Commissioners or the School Board would find a way to use it for such purpose, especially as they try and stretch their budget dollars thinner and thinner. You may not like the method or the tone of this letter, but is it really any different?
This group’s members appear ready to at least try and raise private dollars on something that is important to them, and they want to understand the intent of the folks that they may have to share it with. There are plenty of wealthy individuals in Lebo, and potentially more who can band together to create wealth. If they use this “power” wisely and appropriately, don't be surprised (or offended) by what they can and will accomplish.
If we've learned anything at all about our community in the last year it is that we don't have enough tax dollars to pay for everything that makes Mt. Lebanon “special” to each of us. Some may prefer First Fridays to street cleaning services. Some may favor a partially renovated high school to a brand new one. And some may favor improving our athletic fields. Sadly, we don't have the cash to satisfy everyone.
Like it or not, we are at a point where those who step up (with the money and public support) may accomplish their goals faster than those who do not. Talk is cheap and ideas are great -- but the cash to fund those ideas is even better.
As I wrote to a School Director who wrote to me after reading this post, "I have no objection to having private money in a development plan. I
would like to see the money first, rather than being subjected to an
"or else" threat to withhold it, and I would like to see
private/public partnerships proceed in coordination with the
district's priorities."
Mike, this isn't my fight, but where you see a threat, I see a smart fundraising move.
What intelligent individual in this community will contribute meaningful dollars to this or any other private-public project without some commitment from the folks on the public side whose efforts and votes will be needed to make it work. We've learned in Lebo (perhaps the hard way) that banks don't loan money to condo and office developers without pre-sales and pre-leasing. This is no different. How can this group (or any other group) begin to recruit private donors if the elected officials won't even state a general position on an initiative, let alone a firm commitment?
Dave, I don't think that the hypothetical process is as difficult as you imagine.
I'll make up some numbers. Assume 5 donors and a willingness to contribute $100k each.
Suppose each of these 5 people were to say -- publicly -- "I promise to contribute $100k of my money (for a total of $500k) if the District puts up $100k (another invented figure) of its own." There is no reason to connect this to a School Board election at all. If the District then comes up with its contribution, then the deal gets sealed. If not, then the promise goes away. This sort of fundraising happens all the time, in both not-for-profit fundraising and private development.
In fact, I suspect that the dynamics of not-for-profit fundraising are somewhat more straightforward than the dynamics of getting a real estate developer to commit early dollars before getting government approval, because donors aren't looking for financial returns.
That doesn't mean that not-for-profit fundraising isn't complicated, only that getting prospective donors to make pre-commitments isn't so scary-difficult that people need to resort to threats to get what they think is the right result.
I see and read bullying here (in the "questionnaire"). I object to bullying by adults even more than I object to bullying by children. Our kids deserve better models.
If any of the candidates/current board members choose to respond to the "questionaire" those replues should be made available to the entire community.
Joe Wertheim
There have been a number of very successful local public/private partnership ventures or developments exactly like the example Mike describes. None of them occured because of threats, intimidation, coercion or bullying by one party, related or unrelated to an election campaign. All were done in the spirit of the end result... all were of varying degrees of difficulty in negotiation and execution... all involved joint financial & in-kind committments...and the following are a few sports & recreation examples :
- Indoor Tennis
- Platform Tennis
- Wildcat Scoreboard
- Athletic Field Maintenance
- Municipal Parks/Playgrounds:
Main Park/Martha's Fund
Williamsburg Park/Playground
Country Club Park/Playground
- School Playgrounds...many
Granted that none of these examples are of the financial scope the "Partnership" has in mind; however, should that really make any difference....isn't it the principles and processes that count, whether you're talking about $1 million or $10 million ?
My comment about lobbying had little to do with PA lobbying statutes but all about federal, as they relate to 501(c)(3)entities in the Internal Revenue Code & Regulations. There are 11 field sports & supportive 501(c)(3) organizations based in Mt Lebanon.
Mike, I think you and I have wildly different definitions of bullying. Take the money out of this equation (after all these folks aren't obligated to raise 10 cents for this or any other cause) and instead make it just about votes. If demanding or even requesting a politician's position on an issue prior to casting my vote is bullying, then our entire political system is based on bullying. That's absurd.
If there's a lesson to be learned or an example to be set for my kids from this one, I want it to be that you can ask questions of our elected officials and EXPECT an answer. Of course, you may disagree with the answer, but you should get one.
Mike, even if the board member or candidate that you've dealt with didn't want to respond to these questions or was offended by their tone or perceived intent, I personally would have preferred something a bit more mature than forwarding the letter to a blog. And if that's what he or she actually thought was the best course of action (knowing full well that it would end up online), I would have preferred that it be accompanied by his or her own analysis or objections, rather than yours.
Dave, if all that we read in the letter was "what's your position, so I know how to vote," then the letter would be unremarkable (as you say) and there would be nothing to discuss.
That's not what the letter says. The letter says (and I'm paraphrasing, but only slightly): We demand that you agree that *our* priority should be the *District's* priority.
You're right in one sense -- that this is the way that a lot of contemporary politics is conducted. That doesn't mean that I should let it pass. A lot of contemporary politics constitutes single-issue "bullying" in exactly the same sense. Sometimes it's bullying *of* politicians and candidates; sometimes it's bullying *by* politicians and candidates.
I don't think that it's absurd to to think that such an approach to public service, public servants, and public policy is corrosive of our little community and of society at large. I think that it's sane.
"We demand that you agree that *our* priority should be the *District's* priority."
Yeah? So what?
When someone goes before the Traffic Board and says, "You should put speed humps on my street," aren't they demanding that their priority be the community's priority?
When a group of folks dressed in colorful shirts bearing the slogan "Build Our School Now" shows up at a school board meeting and speaks (rather aggressively) about how we need a new school now, aren't they demanding that their priority be the District's priority?
When a group of concerned parents show up at a Commissioner's meeting to demand that a police officer not be reassigned to Keystone Oaks, aren't they demanding that their priority be the community's priority?
When people speak out against the development of a health club or condos on unused or under-used property in our town, aren't they demanding that their priority be the community's priority?
Mike, just last week, didn't you suggest that we should consider holding certain Commissioners "accountable" when they are up for re-election based solely on their handling of the recent Boards & Authorities appointments?
I don't see this concerted effort as being any different than these examples. However, what I DO see is a growing trend among some of our elected officials or candidates to avoid taking a position, to avoid conflict and to avoid being accountable. I say "some" because I have learned that several board members/candidates have elected to respond to this questionnaire. To be fair, I don't know who has responded and who hasn't, but I can only assume that since the letter ended up in your hands and on this blog, that at least one (or more) of the intended recipients took issue with it.
Here's a newsflash . . . everyone who pays taxes has an agenda. Some people like the Library more than they like the tennis courts. Some people prefer a new field house over a new fine arts wing. Some people prefer investing more education dollars in Biology for high schoolers rather than Japanese for 5th graders. Why else would we allow and encourage public comments at our School Board meetings? Some residents choose to stay quiet on most issues, others choose to speak up on issues that impact them directly, and still others choose to speak up on just about anything and everything. But make no mistake about it, we all have agendas that control how we vote, donate, volunteer or otherwise engage ourselves. Most folks don't (and won't) fully engage themselves in causes (including elections) that they don't feel strongly about.
The risks to any of these school board members/candidates in not responding or in responding honestly to the questionnaire are simple: (a) they may lose the votes of the people in this group and perhaps the people that they associate with and (b) they may lose the potential for private dollars being raised for this or any other project. Those aren't unusual or abnormal risks or threats for people who have chosen to (or who are asking to) SERVE the residents in this capacity. Every decision by an elected official will usually involve pleasing some of his constituents and upsetting others. If that's offensive, threatening or troublesome to you, please get out of the game.
Going back and forth on this isn't going to resolve anything, but hopefully anyone else still reading at this point has a clearer sense of the different perspectives. We just see this part of the world differently. When I evaluate candidates and when I vote, I don't imagine that I'm trying to find the candidate whose agenda most closely aligns with mine. I'm trying to find the candidate who I think has the best combination of background, skills, interests, and temperament to serve as a a community leader: to identify priorities, to differentiate among kinds of need, and to make decisions, and to supervise implementing programs. I am, you might say, a Madisonian Madison: both voters and officials are self-interested, and the political system should be designed so as to blunt the effect of self-interest.
One final note: I did criticize the Mt. Lebanon Commission recently for its handling of volunteer board appointments and urged the voters to hold commissioners accountable. From where I sit, that's consistent with what I'm saying here. My point then and my point now is about process. Elected officials and folks who work in government offices have special duties -- both legal and ethical -- to treat citizens fairly. Should athletic facilities in Mt. Lebanon be first among equal priorities for the school district? Perhaps, if the Board, after considering the needs and resources of the District, decides that this should be so.
It's great that these people, whoever they are, are willing to mix their private fortunes with the fortunes of the community. We need more of that, not less. My grandfather, Martin Tressel, did that very thing decades ago to help build the tennis courts.
But there's an overtone of aggression and anger in their letter that I don't care for, and I don't think my grandfather would have liked it either.
I also object to their assertion that they are the only group in Mt. Lebanon with their skin in the game. That's presumptuous, and rather dismissive of the contributions of many, many other people in this community.
They have every right to form a bloc to affect their agenda. But I hope in politics they will take the sporting attitude of "It's not whether you win or lose - it's how you play the game" rather than "Winning isn't everything - it's the only thing."
My own favorite sporting quotation is from Vince Lombardi: "It is essential to understand that battles are primarily won in the hearts of men." That letter didn't win the battle in my heart, but I'm willing to hear them again if they tone down the rhetoric.
I'd like to include a few of my favorite Lombardi quotes in the School Board's manual. They include:
"Some of us will do our jobs well and some will not, but we will be judged by only one thing - the result."
"Winning is not a sometime thing: it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do the right thing once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing."
Don't get me wrong. Our students, teachers, staff and coaches have done marvelous things in the past and will continue to achieve through strong character, commitment and plain old hard work.
Unfortunately, our School Board of late has a string of 0'fers and is hovering around the Mendoza Line.
Personally, I dislike athletic metaphors of all kinds when it comes to education. Lombardi preached winning for the sake of winning, which I think is exactly *not* the thing that our schools should be teaching our children.
Winning is great; winning is fun; it's important to know how to win (and how to lose). I was a competitive athlete for many years and a coach for many years as well. I won championships. I brought home trophies. I know how to win, and I won.
Winning is, however, not at all about results. Winning is about character.
So instead of Lombardi, who I would banish from the halls, fields, and courts of Mt. Lebanon, I would choose just about any quotation from John Wooden, who is a far, far better model of coach, teacher, mentor, and leader than anyone ever associated with the Green Bay Packers. And who won far more championships, far more impressively, than Lombardi ever did.
OK, here is one Wooden quotation for you:
"It isn't what you do, but how you do it."
Mike, now you're speaking my language. Would Wooden have approved of the letter's tone, perhaps not (but then again, you've only shown folks half of it). I do believe however (as someone who has now read the entire thing) that he would have thoroughly approved of their passion.
As someone who has an autographed copy of Wooden's Pyramid of Success on his office wall, a worn out, dog-eared, autographed copy of his book, and a business card size version of his Pyramid in my wallet, I can certainly apply his lessons to this situation.
For example, "Being average means you are as close to the bottom as you are to the top."
But something perhaps even more appropriate to the current debate can be found in the book "Wooden":
"We get stronger when we test ourselves. Adversity can make us better. We must be challenged to improve, and adversity is the challenger."
I don't want our School Board to duck the challenge or the challenger, and that's what I saw when some cried foul over this letter.
In closing, I'll share one last Wooden maxim that clearly applies to our schools, "No matter how great your product, if your sales department doesn't produce, you won't get the results you want."
Dave, you're right that I didn't post the whole letter. The full text is pretty long (and in my opinion, redundant - if passionate). To be fair to its authors, I tried to include the material that has a less aggressive tone. I omitted what I thought was the more over-the-top material. But I don't mind posting the whole thing, if people are interested.
In response to Mr. Huston's earlier challenge of "You know who I am. Who are you?", allow me to tell you "who I am."
I've been a proud resident of Mt. Lebanon since 1971, when my wife and I bouught our first (and only) home here. We located here because Mt. Lebanon was clearly the pre-eminent community and school district in this region, and we wanted our (hoped for) children to have the best education (including the best facilities) possible. This was a dream come true for a girl from East Liberty and a guy from Philly. We were blessed with two children who graduated from Lebo. Along the way, I coached boys and girls youth baseball,soccer and softball because I CARED about not only my children, but also about all of the young people in our community. Long after my children graduated, I continued to coach and serve as a Director for Lebo Girls Softball because I CARED about the program. I have served for many years on panels for interviewing, selecting and promoting both Sworn Police Officers and Career Firefighters in our community because I CARED about these professionals who serve and protect us, and felt this was another way to give back something to the community. I have been the statistician for Mt. Lebanon varsity football for 13 years (hey, I'm an "Athletic Supporter", Mr. Huston), not because I have a son or relative playing, but because I CARE about the program and our student athletes who dedicate themselves to it. I participated in the formulation of the School District's first strategic plan because I CARED about the future of our schools. I have worked in concert with other district administrators on other projects too numerous to mention, because, guess what, I CARE. I am also very proud that I have served on the Board of Directors of Goodwill Industries of SWPA (including a term as chair) for over 14 years, because I CARE about people in our communities with special needs (yes, we even have them in Mt. Lebanon) who are helped by Goodwill to overcome barriers to employment so they can enjoy the dignity and benefits that work affords them. That's who I am, Mr. Huston. I frankly DON'T CARE who you are. This is the first-and last-post I will make to this or any other blog. You see, I'm not a "blogger"; I'm a doer. I do things in our community because I CARE, and one of the things I care about now is trying to help develop a public-private partnership here that will ultimately result in Mt. Lebanon once again being "best in class" - a distinction it sadly no longer enjoys. I assure you that the other members of our group have similarly given back to this community their time, their expertise, their resources and personal finances because they, too, CARE about Mt. Lebanon. Period.
If you or any of your bloggers would like to meet with me to really understand what we "extortionists" are all about (since you haven't a clue), feel free to call me at 412.341.4448 (my business). I will be happy to arrange a meeting with you (and the rest of our group as well).
David Reese
(P.S. As of today, April 16, 7 of the 13 incumbents and candidates for school board seats have responded to our questionnaire. I guess it isn't so onerous and threatening after all.)
If anyone needed confirmation of my position that the tone of the "athletic facilities questionnaire" was inappropriately aggressive and bullying, then David Reese's comment provides it.
It is perfectly reasonable for David or anyone working with him (or who agrees with him) to respond to David Huston, or me, or Bill Lewis (among other commenters) on the merits. As in: "The Mt. Lebanon athletic facilities are in terrible disrepair and someone needs to step up and do something soon. It's with worthwhile community spirit that we've chosen to put ourselves out there on this issue, and we hope to persuade you that it's an issue that is worth your time and money. Our questionnaire was and is a good faith effort to initiate a dialogue on the topic, and we're grateful that many School Board candidates have responded to it. We're sorry that some people interpreted our effort as "some form of extortion"; that was and is not our intention. Let's continue the discussion in a constructive way."
Unfortunately, that's not what David Reese has written. Draw your own conclusions.
Mike "Blogging is Doing, and I'm Blogging *and* Doing, Because I Care" Madison
Mike,
Please post the rest of the "questionnaire"....the "over the top" passages that few outside of the *Athletic Supporters* have seen.
And,while awaiting those further disclosures, it might be well for some of the *Supporters* to reflect on the apparent fact that they have learned little from Positive Coaching Alliance training seminars and Code of Conduct provisions such as "Never use unfair play or intimidation to win". As such, some of them seem to have not yet earned a seat at the adult table.
One factor that may be under-appreciated in this conversation is that communicating effectively is hard. Putting ideas into words and having those words mean what you think they mean is a difficult, error-prone task. Maybe the threatening tone of the questionnaire was unintentional, the byproduct of a weary writer attempting to rise to a difficult challenge. It's plausible, right?
At least, that's what I was thinking until I read Mr. Reese's response.
Mr. Reese,
Your demonstrated passion for Mt. Lebanon's community, schools, and athletic organizations speaks is impressive. I'm glad I know more about that (even though I feel like I have been yelled at).
No one suggested any of the authors of the letter didn't care about these things. Of course we couldn't begin to guess the specifics because until now we didn't know who wrote the letter.
It's great that you have now stepped up and put your name behind your cause, as I understand the other authors will also soon do. Now I would agree that you do indeed have your skin in the game.
But what are you so angry about? And why do you dismiss the other people here (as bloggers instead of doers) when you don't know our own stories? You might be alienating potential allies. You can correct me if I'm wrong, but I assume you want as much of the public as you can get in your public/private partnership.
As for the school board members and candidates, I would venture to guess that they responded to your letter simply because all constituents deserve a response.
Post a Comment
<< Home