By Kim Siebert MacPhail
While exchanges remained civil, disagreement was apparent between the Selectmen and Dave Sukoff, chair of the Outdoor Recreation Area Study Committee, at Monday night’s Selectmen’s meeting.
At issue was the sense that the majority of the Selectmen favor the development of two natural grass, large, rectangular athletic playing fields on the former St. Michael’s land.Their contention was that Town Meeting,by the approving the expenditure of $150,000, had authorized the Selectmen to determine which type of field design should be chosen—synthetic or natural grass. If synthetic turf is chosen, the full $150,000 would be used for design; if natural grass is selected, only about $60,000 of the total would be needed.
Although on Monday the Selectmen did not conclude which direction to take –they will revisit them atter for a vote at their next meeting on December 10—a majority of the members indicated that they preferred the natural grass option. Cost played a significant role in this preference:$650,000 for two grass fields versus $2,450,000 for two synthetic turf fields. There was, as well, an expressed sense of obligation to move a long-delayed project forward.
Looking at the difference in projected costs, Selectman Margot Fleischman said, “It seems to me, with the cost differential being so great, especially when you take into consideration the replacement cost for the turf surface—a difference of $1.8M—it may make sense to think about a new regime for fields maintenance in the future. But, frankly, if we sink all our money into construction and then replacement costs—ongoing for many decades for synthetic turf—I don’t think that’s helping our financial bottom line.
“I think the political will to turf the high school field had a lot to do with it being the high school field—the lights and the stadium seating and the marquee location in our community,” Fleischman continued. “I don’t see the same people that supported that being happy with this price tag.”
Colleague Mark Siegenthaler agreed. “I don’t see how you could possibly think that it’s responsible to now say ‘Let’s now design the artificial turf because we’re ready to go back and ask the town for $2.5M to build those fields,’ when you could design and build the natural grass fields for a quarter of the cost. I don’t see that as being a difficult decision.”
Selectman Cathy Cordes and DPW Director Rich Warrington spoke about the longevity of the St. Michael’s project. “These two fields have been envisioned for a very long time, going back to the mid-90s—studies that we did then with an ad hoc committee with the schools and Recreation and Public Works,” said Warrington. “In my opinion, this will satisfy demand to a reasonable level.”
Asked by Selectman Moonan about when the fields would come online if Town Meeting voted money for the project this March, Director Warrington calculated that the fields would be online by the fall of 2014.
Sukoff, however, took exception to what he saw as a premature decision that circumvented the need for ORASC’s analysis.Selectman Mike Rosenberg also questioned the need for an accelerated timeline, and how additional grass fields would affect an already heavy DPW workload.Selectman Bill Moonan worried, too, about rushing into a decision “without knowing all the pieces of the puzzle.”
If the Selectmen decided to move ahead with the natural grass decision, Sukoff asked the Selectmen what that would mean for ORASC. “I don’t mean to be. . . .I mean, we spent an entire summer to make the case for Town Meeting for Sabourin Field. I presume that anything the Town would like to do next would appreciate the same kind of thoughtful analysis. Clearly that’s not happening here. We haven’t even recommended whether it should be grass or turf
. . . .We haven’t said what should come next.”
Selectman chair Cathy Cordes responded, “Well, you did list a series of options in your report.”
“If you’re ready to take those options, I can tell everyone [on ORASC] that we’re done,” Sukoff replied. “We’re serving at your request. Do you want the rest of the analysis? It doesn’t sound like it.”
Selectman Moonan said, “I personally think there’s more to be done. If the rest of the Selectmen determine that the next step is grass fields at St. Michael’s, I still think there’s work for you to do.”
“From my vantage point,” added Selectman Siegenthaler, “St. Michael’s is the next step. . . .I’d be happy if the task force wants to continue, knowing that Sabourin has been resolved. Depending on our vote next week—the St. Michael’s fields may be resolved. . . .You made the case for three full-sized rectangular fields. . . .We may say next week that we’re prepared to go forward—at least with design—on two fields at St. Michael’s. . . .I don’t see that there’s anything wrong with that. It just changes your next starting point.”
“But it’s possible we may not need anything more than Sabourin,” Sukoff continued. “I don’t know that—I don’t necessarily think that’s the case— but it’s possible.”
“We wouldn’t know that until after Sabourin is built and fully operational,” Cordes responded.
Sukoff added, “I think a lot of the reason that Sabourin was successful is that there was a reasoned analysis behind it. If you go forward with a plan that doesn’t have the backing of a reasoned analysis, you might have trouble with it.”
Cordes and Siegenthaler replied that Town Meeting approved the design money in November following the turf field vote. “Why did we ask for and why did Town Meeting pass the design money if all we’re going to do is sit on it until some moment in time when more analysis is done?” asked Siegenthaler.
“Actually, it was promised at Town Meeting that the money would not be spent until the analysis was done,” Sukoff replied. “Now, you’re going to spend the money without the analysis. . . .You did promise on [the] Town Meeting floor to wait.”
“We have different memories of what happened on the floor of Town Meeting for that particular expenditure,” responded Siegenthaler, with Cordes in agreement.
“Let’s go to the tape,” replied Sukoff.
Further discussion on the matter was tabled until the next meeting on Monday, Dec. 10, when the Selectmen are expected to vote on how to proceed.
Loading ...
