First turf, then track... what else?
The turf discussion has suddenly gotten very muddy. Besides the question that existed last year:
Do we replace the track and deal with the turf simultaneously?
The Council has now been asked to resurface the "D" on the south-end (or left-side) of the track:
And here are the cost details that were provided last night:
Notice the "add-ons" at the bottom?
And suddenly an $850,000 turf project that's supposed to be "free-of-charge" to Cheshire... and a $280,000 track resurfacing project get coupled with another $100,000 to resurface the D... and we're off to the races! Referendum here we come!
There are a lot of moving pieces and options here that I won't discuss now. At this point, I wanted to put this before you for discussion purposes.
Tim White
20 comments:
The "Add Ons" got to me this evening because we never discussed these and I would say 5 out of 6 members present tonight never saw these before, myself included. We were surprised and it's not a good kind of surprise. In fact, I'm embarrassed by it.
I'm baffled as to how some BOE members are apprehensive to discuss long-term costs but don't question the add-ons that aren't even in the funding equation at this point.
I think it's way too premature to assume the turf project is going to come in under budget and that there will be money leftover from fundraising to pay for add-ons.
BTW, the Ram logo in the middle of the Turf is an $18,000 option.
Tony P
There are way too many questions that need to be answered before this can be approved.
What happens if the "proposed funding" that Bob Behrer presented falls short? Who gets held responsible?
Who controls all that money?
Is the $12,655 savings for maintenance accurate?
How much do they expect the maintenance of the turf field will be? Don't they have to replace the rubber crumbs each year? How much? Doesn't it have to be disinfected peridically?How much?
Do the lines have to be repainted? How much?
How many people and how often do they need to work to maintain the field? How much?
What happens if there is a rip or tear? Do they need to patch it? How much?
I wouldn't approve this until the fundraisers have raised enough to install this turf and have enough in an account for a replacement.
Does Bob and the turf committee know for sure that the replacement will "only" be $394,000? Will there be add-ons in the 8-12 years?
According to Bob's estimates, they will raise $34,000 a year for replacement. If the turf needs to be replaced in 8 years (more realistic), that will only be $272,000. Who covers the rest?
Way too many unanswered questions...
Tim - I think that it is great that you have the time to say no to everything. What have you every said yes to? I know that you wanted to investigate performance based contracting and nothing got until Matt Alteri looked into it and got Celtic engery involved last Oct. Now almost a year later what have you done to advance this project? Have you, with a 7-2 majority done anything? Held a meeting? Worked with town hall to produce a proposal? You have done nothing and you have rubber stamped what the town manager and David S. tell you to do. I am still waiting for you lead something, but I getting old. Leadership is just not saying no.
9:24 You might want to proof read your comment.
"Way too many unanswered questions..."
I think some questions have been answered such how much money is being raised via fundraising. The goal is to raise $875,000. According to the CheshireAlumniField website, $200,000 has been raised via donations and $525,000 via grant putting us $725,000. We still need $150,000 in donations to meet the goal.
Another question was answered through the design phase. The primary goal for hiring an engineer was to design the field and get firm estimates on turf AND track installation costs. $868,616 for track (without add-ons) and $320,126 for the track field (without add-ons).
One can argue that the engineer came close to the original goal of $875,000 that is needed to be raised for the turf. Bob Behrer has assured us that WHATEVER the cost of the turf field is once bids come in, it will be paid by fundraising. Fine.
Track estimates have come in over what we budgeted for in the capital plan. So, one unanswered question is: Does the capital plan line item for Track Resurfacing need to change to reflect the new estimate? I think so. Is the town on the hook to pay for it OR will the difference be paid for by donated funds? This is where it gets muddied because if the difference is going to be paid for via raised funds then doesn't the donation goal need to change?
The BOE is not going to request any changes to the capital plan. I tried Thurs night without success. So, as it stands...the capital plan is short on these projects.
The design phase has been completed in time for the capital budget vote by the TC. That was the goal. We received firm costs, goal accomplished. But consider the following:
- We didn't raise all of the funds needed to pay for turf, let alone track.
- We don't have a BOE-approved plan to submit to the TC on how this field is going to be funded for long-term replacement costs.
- We don't know if we can legally setup a fund to capture gifts, donations, banner sales, service fees collected.
- This past spring, when hundreds of parents packed TC chambers in support of a higher education budget, many wanted the ability to contribute money to the school budget but they were told this cannot be legally accomplished. How is it that doing the same, for Turf, CAN be accomplished?
- Sorry to be redundant, but the BOE has not committed to the turf project.
My point is that the capital budget deadline has come and gone for getting our (BOE) act together on a plan for turf. Clearly, we're not ready to initiate and PAY for this project in Year 1 of the capital plan.
So, to the disappointment of my fellow BOE colleagues who support turf and to the Turf Committee, I think the prudent and fiscally responsible thing to do is to move the Turf field item to Year 2 (or remove it completely ) of the capital plan for the following reasons:
- Give the Turf Committee more time to raise the remainder of the funds needed to achieve their goal.
- This allows the BOE to once, and for all, discuss responsible funding options for the life-cycle costs of the field. It started with the BOE, it's going to be (presumably) run by the BOE so the responsible thing to do is follow through on planning.
- In the meantime, the BOE, Turf Committee and TC can work with our finance office to determine what can be done from a legal standpoint in capturing funds for the turf field. More importantly, accounting procedures and policies must be defined around how money is going to move between the fund raisers and the Town.
- More importantly...the BOE must vote on committing to this project.
I'm also under the assumption that the BOE can, at any time, go back to the TC and request Turf to be put back on the plan in Year 1 if we believe we have the answers to the above and it can be initiated in Year 1.
So, again...I ask the turf committee, the administration, the BOE...What's the rush? We're not ready.
Tony Perugini
What have you every said yes to?
While you may feel I voted "no" on the police dept consultant, I feel that I said "yes" to taxpayers keeping their money. My "yes" applies to pretty much any time I vote in favor of taxpayers keeping their money.
Now almost a year later what have you done to advance this project? Have you, with a 7-2 majority done anything? Held a meeting? Worked with town hall to produce a proposal?
I've been trying to keep people aware of this via the blog. I've been staying on top of it by way of staying in touch with staff, the energy commission, Council leadership and Celtic... and ensuring the capital budget discussions have encompassed it. The RFP is currently with the Town Atty, but should be issued soon.
You have done nothing and you have rubber stamped what the town manager and David S. tell you to do.
Haha... that's a good one. I do what David and the TM tell me to do!
Police consultant? Asst Town Planner? That position disappeared after I (and Anne G) pushed to defund it. Slowly, but surely, we are moving past the bubble. The Planning Committee has taken up my goal of prioritizing various PW projects.
There are some good things happening. I wish there was more, but the Council focused the first half of the year on the pool structure and the operating budget. I think those were reasonable priorities and we're past both now... so other things are moving.
- "This past spring, when hundreds of parents packed TC chambers in support of a higher education budget, many wanted the ability to contribute money to the school budget but they were told this cannot be legally accomplished."
Careful how you say this. Parents CAN contribute money for education at any time. All they have to do is write a check to the Town of Cheshire and designate their donation be used towards books, supplies or whatever. I did it - they can too.
"Careful how you say this. Parents CAN contribute money for education at any time. All they have to do is write a check to the Town of Cheshire and designate their donation be used towards books, supplies or whatever. I did it - they can too."
They can write a check to the Town of Cheshire but directly to the BOE. That was the jist of my comment earlier. THANK YOU for your donation!
Tony P
"not" directly to the BOE.
- Tony
Tony
I appreciate you listing the questions that have been answered, but you have to admit, there are still some unanswered questions.
I would also mention that what happens if we install this and they were off on their maintenance figures and it will cost more? Or they didn't raise enough for the replacement when it needs replacing?
You still don't know how to handle the fundraising money. This cannot be pushed through until every question is answered in an accurate (not vague) way. These numbers have to be accurate.
9:24
You state:
"I know that you wanted to investigate performance based contracting and nothing got until Matt Alteri looked into it and got Celtic engery involved last Oct."
Are you talking about the Matt Altirir who ignored Tim's request for months but 1 month before the election, in a last ditch effort to try and win votes, he decided to look into it? Are you serious?
Altieri ignored getting involved ever since Tim brought it up to the council.
That is a joke!
Thanks for posting on all this Tony. Some will knock Tim for the blog, but you are a perfect example of how it works. I know more about the workings of the BOE now than in the past 11yrs my kid has been in the school system - thanks to you. Now I need to harass you a little bit:)
--- Unless Bob B is putting up his house or personal property to cover any unfunded expenses, I am not assured about anything, why is it fine by you? He obviously isn't thinking rationally if he thinks this plan is ready to be put into action.How do you guarantee that other people are going to donate? I personally have to question the numbers as a whole. If he is willing to push this through with so many unanswered questions and funding that is sketchy at best, it wouldn't surprise me that they down played the numbers.
--- the goal our mayor put out there should not have happened. If the goal was 875,000 who did the honorable mayor think was going to come up with the rest? I remember cringing when he threw that proposal out there at the TC meeting.
--- funny the engineer "they" hired came up with the same numbers...maybe we should use him again on the project. If he was way off, we probably wouldn't. ---you said the BOE needs to discuss responsible funding options for funding life cycle costs. I will help you out with this one:
Costs minus fund raising = some sort of tax. Call it property taxes, surcharge on sporting tickets, pay to play, whatever you want.
--- I guess re doing the track will have to be held up until the turf is OK'd or put to bed? What if it take more than 2 yrs to get it together? Still no track, right? The "D" has needed upgrading for yrs....now its an "add on"? to the turf project?
I appreciate that yor probably being a bit kind to your fellow BOE colleagues, but there is a bunch of money at stake here along with the need to not stick the residents with another pool fiasco.
$18,000 for the ram logo? I thought this was a "community field"? "Cheshire Community field" would be fine and not cost $18,000.
On the Turf field, Brittingham has drank the Kool-Aid and he is for it. I hope Tony can wrestle this idiotic project out of the BOE agenda
"Community Field"
Interesting term...because the turf field is a community field. I can tell you that 300 events on the proposed turf field won't all come from CHS. It's a community field, at least it will be if this passes.
So, if it's a community field why are we proposing to run a community field with the BOE? The BOE mandated responsibility is ensuring quality education is being delivered within our school district.
Managing a community field, along with the infrastructure, policies, procedures and personnel that comes with it, seems like a distraction from our mission especially when ~80% of the events are not related to CHS. (I'm using a basis of 60 events per year related to CHS and the rest is non-CHS events.) Though I'm not certain we've defined an 'event' on this field, yet.
Wouldn't a community field be better run, managed under Parks & Rec where it can potentially use economies of scale from existing personnel and maintenance infrastructure? Much like the town pool, I can see a situation whereby the BOE is using a small portion of the CHS field for education-related activities and pays a fee (ala pool) to the Town.
Encumbering revenue, storing it into accounts/funds, managing the transfer of money generated from transactions for the use of the field, etc, etc, etc. doesn't seem like something that should be under the BOE's sphere of influence. Why would the BOE need to concern itself with running and maintaining town infrastructure? We have a Town Hall that can/is doing that already.
To a certain extent, setting up the turf field to become truly self-sufficient is the same as privatizing the field. The less it becomes paid for and maintained by public-funds (i.e. tax dollars) and the more it relies on donations and revenue to operate...sounds like a privatized field to me.
Just sharing some random thoughts.
- Tony
Tony "... can tell you that 300 events on the proposed turf field won't all come from CHS. It's a community field, at least it will be if this passes...."
Tony, it isn't even a community field. It's more like an evolving monster that is poised to chow down on every available tax dollar and then some.
The BOE shows its true long term worth by being the unwitting sponsor of such an enterprise. Like most BOEs it has its hands full just trying to provide a basic k-12 education for everyone who lives in town.
The BOE needs to refocus back to its true mission, education of the masses from kindergarten to high school. Take all the BOE energy being spent on the money monster and focus it on the math curriculum for 5 or 10 years for instance. And find some maintenance practices which will result in the current field remaining useful and serviceable for its intended purpose which if I am not mistaken was really physical education of ALL the students at the high school.
Beautiful Tony....more common sense. Looking at it that way, community field, you are aboslutely right. Parks and Rec..that will also take out some of the "turf wars" that will probably erupt when some high school sports need to make room for some of these other turf users such as youth football, youth soccer....with 300 events I guess there won't be any time for holding any regular practices on the turf???
Free up your time for more important educational items.
The only reason I see that the turf committee/athletic director started calling this the "community field" is because they probably thought they'd get more support if they try to claim it'll benefit the whole town.
Face it - it's really still the "football field" and will be controlled by all those who control football.
2:15 - you are right....I was getting a little delirious trying to figure out how the numbers work...
-9:28
Don't know why they also refer to it as the "alumni field"...just call it what it is...the artificial turf field that they want for the football team.
The local spin doctors just can't get enough when it comes to artificial turf. Call it this and call it that. Try to find a phrase for it to capture the imaginations of as many voters as possible.
In the end, at this time of the Krugman Depression call it what it would really be, one really nasty cash sucking monster whose appetite for tax dollars might wind up making the other cash monster across the street look good - - -
Post a Comment