" Just for the record many, many, of Auburns athletes are some of the best students at AHS. Many athletes rank in the top 20% of their class. These student athletes have been admitted and will attend schools like Geneseo, Binghamton, Notre Dame, St. Joesphs, Hamilton, and SU. My point is do not ever assume that athletics and scholastics are exclusive of each other. Renovating or not renovating Holland stadium will not affect the quality education kids get. Don't confuse this issue and say we need more teachers, or more books instead of turf. Many of the athletes have figured out how to be good students. Educators will tell you that "practice" makes good students not more teachers or school supplies. "

" Please listen this time. I have said this over and over. There will be no added expense to replace a turf field because there will be consideral savings in not needing to water, fertilize, mow and reseed the old grass. This alone will produce enough savings to fund replacement in the future. This does not even take in the ability to make rental money for club leagues, concerts and special events. If the local funding is raised from private donations, then where is the problem? How can you be so thick-headed and stubborn to not think this out. Do the math and the answer is staring you in your face. "

" Why is it that these same people would never be caught dead raising money for the local schools? To hire more teachers or new technology? I am a big time sports fan and I say for this community it is a very selfish tactic even if donated. Worry about the children's education and not their accomplishments on the playing field seeing only a small percentage and I mean microscopic will go on to do anything in their chosen sport. As for Skaneateles they can afford it. As for us, our schools struggle to make the grade and yet people have the nerve to fight for turf instead of fighting for our childrens future??? Turf will not ever help this future. Work on grades, and graduation and not wins and losses. "

" Take a look at the Artist View in todays paper, no work, sooner or later people move to find jobs else where,who is going to pay the rising taxes and cost in the future? "

" So it's not going to cost 'us' local taxpayers a 'dime' to install this artificial turf because of the various people, etc. contributing what 'we' locals would have to kick in via our local taxes, eh? Really? How nice! Now how about getting a realistic estimate (I haven't seen one yet)of what it will cost to refurbish this turf in 8 - 10 years because then there won't be any State Aid and publish that figure on the front page of The Citizen. Next, have the school board and the Superintendent go out and beat the bushes and see if they can get contributions for this and future 8-10 refurbishments of this 'field of dreams.' Rotsa Ruck!! Why the h**l is this thing being shoved down our throats again, when just a few years ago, we said NO? Such arrogance and brass tacks. And it's still NO and will be NO next year too. Give it a rest guys and gals. There are more important issues in this school district than a 'playing field,' like the drop-out rates, etc., etc., etc... "

" The pro turf people always seem to skirt the fact that the tax payers are going to get hit for the full cost of replacement in a few years. WE DON'T WANT TO PAY FOR THAT IN 8-10 YEARS FROM NOW!! If everybody in the state says no, we don't want that turf, where does that pork money go then?? Do they burn it?? Nooooo....goes back into the coffers. People, it's another way for the state to hit us for more taxes in the future. "

" I don't suppose we could offer up this pork as something the State could cut as they try to pass the budget? Then no one would be paying for anyone else to get turf, and maybe it might help along the budget process! ;-) "

" Mr. Hunter your points: Any hydrocarbons within the infill rubber of a synthetic turf field can only be extracted and thus available for exposure by adding extremely high heat and industrial solvents. These conditions were only possible in a lab not on a playing field.
Multilpe studies show that the injury debate is a draw. Real grass fields usually cause (by % and incidence)more head and neck injuries , which one could argue are more severe. Synthetic turf has a higher(by % and incidence)rate of extremity and ligament injury.

You are also missing the point with synthetic turf installation. The only field that can be used for only 4 months (in our climate) is real grass. Synthetic field turf can be played on roughly four fold more often during peak usage times. That does not even take into account multiple usage right up until the snow accumulates, and as early as February, providing the temperature is warm enough for students to be outside. Real grass can only be "used about 4 months a year" as you wrote. Synthetic turf could be used nonstop for 8-9 months per year.
Local efforts to pay for turf installation is tax free. That is the whole idea to relieve the local taxpayers burden. A state subsidized capitol school project can only use state supplied monies for school district improvement projects which the Holland Stadium renovation project is a part of. These state monies supplied to districts cannot be used for deficit reductions or the like. It is budgeted for school districts within the state. If Auburn does not use it Skaneatles or another district will. Guess what, your taxes paid will go for their projects instead of staying in Auburn.
"

" Any vote other than NO will cost the tax payers money when it comes to the question of Turf. And if you think about it, this is the only tax the voters have a direct say on. So to review, Yes=pay more tax, No=save some money (like the government say we should during this time of financial stress) it's up to you. "

" Also, another point....a few years down the road when that field has to be replaced, who is going to foot the bill then?? Another grant?? I doubt it. The same people that anted up a few
bucks this time?? I'm sure it wil be long forgotten by them by then. So guess who will get stuck with that bill?? We, the Taxpayers, that's who!! "