Capital Budget '10/11: turf
The turf is currently in the first year of the capital budget. Tonight's turf discussion focused on three aspects:
1) The estimated initial cost -- $800,000 to $850,000, detailed here:
2) The estimated replacement cost -- $400,000 to $450,000, every 8 to 15 years
3) The estimated replacement funding -- $40,000 / yr x ten years...
Bob Behrer explained the replacement money would come from:
* $13,000 / yr in costs avoided by having artificial turf, instead of natural turf
* $7,500 to $10,000 / yr in tips for turf
* increased ticket sales; 12,000 tickets vs. 10,000 tickets
* $1 service fee / ticket
=
$35,000 to $40,000 / yr x ten years... used to offset the cost of a replacement field.
I wanted to hear this and am skeptical these numbers would come to fruition. On the other hand, Matt Bowman made a good point. Historically, the town has taken donations / state grants... used them... and asked questions later. Thing is for me though... times are tough. The economy is the worst it's been since the 1930s. And frankly, I'm not a big believer that the economy is about to rebound anytime soon. So I just don't see myself supporting this right now.
Tim White
7 comments:
Where are they going to find 2000 more people? Do they really think that people will watch a game because of the turf? Is the $1 per ticket going to be an increase (tax) in price or will the Boosters give up the profit?
The potential savings due to current economic conditions column is a pipe dream. Seems only a few weeks ago town employees were pontificating that the bids for the bridge replacement on Country Club came in just under the referendum approved limit. We get one small bridge for one heck of a pile of our money. In fact that one bridge will cost almost as much as the whole turf field although that one bridge is like about 12 feet long and just 1 narrow lane in each direction. No great deal on that town bridge project and no doubt if and when the town goes ahead on this turf field it too will wind up as no great deal in terms of any cost savings either.
More likely scenario, install turf and definitely increase the property taxes of the already stressed residents.
A couple of things.
I agree with 8:51, the "potential savingis" is a pipe dream. There are plenty of businesses that are hurting, but not to the point where they can cut their price.
Where in the budget was the cost of maintaining the football field? I have a hard time believing they will save $13,000 a year from maintenance costs. Who will be maintaining the turf field? From what I understand, the rubber crumbs need to be replaced on a yearly basis. What cost is that? Where is their estimated costs for maintaining the field?
Line painting, disinfectant, repairing rips,training costs to teach several people how to properly maintin an $850,000 field. I think this turf committee really needs to show the actual costs that will come with this field. Who will be responsible for maintaining, the BOE or Park & Rec., or Public Works?
10 years will be a stretch for an artificial turf field, especially if they expect as many events to happen as they are saying. What happens if it needs replacing after 7 years? Who makes up the difference?
Finally, who is responsible for collecting the funds for the replacement? Will it be the BOE? The Park & Rec.?
I appreciate the turf committee coming up with the actual costs to install the field, but I think they have a lot more questions to answer before this can be accepted.
If it needs replacing 2x in the next 16 yrs, once every 8 yrs....how does this work. I really can't beleive this will be approved based on wishful thinking at best. Oh wait, this isn't corporate America, its the Town of Cheshire, logical expense planning isn't necesssary if the math doesnt work. I wouold appreciate it a bit more if they said "we are going to pass the expenses onto the tax payors and people attending events, we have no way to pay for it otherwise" I could respect that.
Oh yea...and another 300k for the track we are going to pull up....and where did they pull the 10% for poor economic climate from? So everyone is giving a 10% discount because the economy is so bad, but we have an extra million bucks lying around to possibly complete this job? What am I missing?
The council should give serious thought about adding the turf to the November election. Let the town residents decide if we are to take on this added expense. They did it with the pool, so it should not be a problem for turf. I do not think the group in favor is as large as the group against and would probably get more voters to the polls
"On the other hand, Matt Bowman made a good point. Historically, the town has taken donations / state grants... used them... and asked questions later."
Maybe people have learned from the mistakes of the past and are being smart by wanting the answers to the questions now rather than later.
Post a Comment