AUBURN - This isn't your daddy's turf. Or your mother's, for that matter.
That's what project managers at Parrone Engineering wanted school district residents to know about the proposed synthetic field project for the Auburn Enlarged City School District.
During a community listening session held Wednesday night in the Auburn High School auditorium, engineers and architects brought along samples of what they referred to as “first-generation turf,” which felt like Brillo to the touch, and the modern version they plan to install in one of two playing fields, should the public approve the project this coming fall.
One touch was all it took to persuade Pamela Anderegg, one of the few community members in attendance at the public session who did not have a vested interest in the turf project, except as a taxpayer.
Addressing a group primarily comprised of past or present district employees and school officials, Anderegg said she had initially opposed the move for synthetic turf, and had in fact come to speak out against it.
“Then I felt it. It's not half bad,” she said.
James Paul was not so swayed, driving home the point that while a synthetic turf field sounds nice, it's not necessary. After listening to Michael Montalto of Parrone deliver a five-option a la carte menu of various improvements to whichever field - at the high school or at Holland Stadium - sees artificial turf installed, he remarked on the variety of choices presented to the district.
“I don't see 'necessary,'” he said. “I see 'optional' or 'nice to have.' There's a lot of things that's nice to have, but is it really necessary,” he said. Paul also inquired as to whether a reduction in maintenance costs to synthetic turf might mean more job cuts for employees who now maintain buildings and grounds. That question went unanswered.
Anderegg and Paul were two anomalies in the last of two public feedback sessions. All others in attendance had coached, taught, administrated or otherwise sent children to schools in the district. Following a presentation that talked up the merits of synthetic turf - its consistent playing surface, durability regardless of weather, season or amount of use - most speakers debated where to install it.
Steve Crosby, a guidance counselor and the head varsity boys lacrosse coach, felt strongly that the district should take advantage of the state and BOCES aid available to include artificial turf in the overall $13 million capital project. The majority of teams in that league, he said, have gone the way of artificial turf. and pointed out the district has paid other school areas to let the Auburn team practice on synthetic turf.
“We pay for turf now, just somebody else's,” he said, pointing out that the Auburn school district would be in a position to charge other schools for use of their artificial turf, should the public approve the measure.
“This could be a money-maker,” he said. Crosby said he thought the turf should go to the high school, citing nostalgia for the history of the natural grass field at Holland Stadium. “It should be grass forever,” he said.
Public sentiment for tradition at Holland Stadium's led most speakers to favor the high school for installation.
“When we look at maximum usability it's a no-brainer. It should be here at the high school,” said Al Emmi, a former superintendent of Auburn schools. Still, he cautioned, it would be a “hard road” to sell the proposal to the public.
The school board is slated to decide by Aug. 15 how it will put the capital project proposal to voters in the fall. The major portion of the project involves replacing the roof at the high school and a variety of other projects with a different scope in size at other area schools. These include the synthetic turf field, upgrading windows to meet energy standards, as well as the heating systems in buildings.
Board members are considering whether to put the capital project to voters in one or two parts, leaving the synthetic turf field proposal separate from the rest.
Staff writer Olivia Goldberg can be reached at 253-5311 ext. 235 or olivia.goldberg@lee.net
During a community listening session held Wednesday night in the Auburn High School auditorium, engineers and architects brought along samples of what they referred to as “first-generation turf,” which felt like Brillo to the touch, and the modern version they plan to install in one of two playing fields, should the public approve the project this coming fall.
One touch was all it took to persuade Pamela Anderegg, one of the few community members in attendance at the public session who did not have a vested interest in the turf project, except as a taxpayer.
Addressing a group primarily comprised of past or present district employees and school officials, Anderegg said she had initially opposed the move for synthetic turf, and had in fact come to speak out against it.
“Then I felt it. It's not half bad,” she said.
James Paul was not so swayed, driving home the point that while a synthetic turf field sounds nice, it's not necessary. After listening to Michael Montalto of Parrone deliver a five-option a la carte menu of various improvements to whichever field - at the high school or at Holland Stadium - sees artificial turf installed, he remarked on the variety of choices presented to the district.
“I don't see 'necessary,'” he said. “I see 'optional' or 'nice to have.' There's a lot of things that's nice to have, but is it really necessary,” he said. Paul also inquired as to whether a reduction in maintenance costs to synthetic turf might mean more job cuts for employees who now maintain buildings and grounds. That question went unanswered.
Anderegg and Paul were two anomalies in the last of two public feedback sessions. All others in attendance had coached, taught, administrated or otherwise sent children to schools in the district. Following a presentation that talked up the merits of synthetic turf - its consistent playing surface, durability regardless of weather, season or amount of use - most speakers debated where to install it.
Steve Crosby, a guidance counselor and the head varsity boys lacrosse coach, felt strongly that the district should take advantage of the state and BOCES aid available to include artificial turf in the overall $13 million capital project. The majority of teams in that league, he said, have gone the way of artificial turf. and pointed out the district has paid other school areas to let the Auburn team practice on synthetic turf.
“We pay for turf now, just somebody else's,” he said, pointing out that the Auburn school district would be in a position to charge other schools for use of their artificial turf, should the public approve the measure.
“This could be a money-maker,” he said. Crosby said he thought the turf should go to the high school, citing nostalgia for the history of the natural grass field at Holland Stadium. “It should be grass forever,” he said.
Public sentiment for tradition at Holland Stadium's led most speakers to favor the high school for installation.
“When we look at maximum usability it's a no-brainer. It should be here at the high school,” said Al Emmi, a former superintendent of Auburn schools. Still, he cautioned, it would be a “hard road” to sell the proposal to the public.
The school board is slated to decide by Aug. 15 how it will put the capital project proposal to voters in the fall. The major portion of the project involves replacing the roof at the high school and a variety of other projects with a different scope in size at other area schools. These include the synthetic turf field, upgrading windows to meet energy standards, as well as the heating systems in buildings.
Board members are considering whether to put the capital project to voters in one or two parts, leaving the synthetic turf field proposal separate from the rest.
Staff writer Olivia Goldberg can be reached at 253-5311 ext. 235 or olivia.goldberg@lee.net
Citizen
Hot Jobs
New! Off the Menu
The Citizens' Say
Post your comment - click hereThere are 6 comment(s)
PK wrote on Jul 21, 2006 12:38 PM:
Don, Killeen, Tx wrote on Jul 20, 2006 5:21 PM:
Jerry Morgan wrote on Jul 20, 2006 2:32 PM:
taxpayer wrote on Jul 20, 2006 1:24 PM:
Put it in Holland! Do the right thing (economically speaking)!! wrote on Jul 20, 2006 1:08 PM:
taxpayer wrote on Jul 20, 2006 11:03 AM: