| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu, Aug 27 2009, 3:27 am EDT Post subject: Ballfield Comments from Candidates |
 |
|
I just saw the meeting notes from July 27. Here are the candidate comments in case people may be interested in their view of the field and spending. Mr. Johnson did not speak. http://www.cranburytownship.org/TC_minutes072709.pdf
Mr. David Cook, North Main Street, stated he appreciates the history narrative on the ball field and he realizes that many of the costs associated with it were unforeseen. Mr. Stout responded Mr. Cook was correct other than Bob Brown of Brown & Keener planned for a “Town Green” along with other amenities such as a corn crib dug out.
Mr. Dan Mulligan, Old Cranbury Road, requested the Township Committee not authorize any more taxpayer dollars to be spent on the ball field. Mayor Stave stated she will not be here next year; however, the Township has applied for grant money to Middlesex County for funds.
Mr. Jay Taylor, 13 South Main Street, stated he agrees with Mr. Sekelsky that someone should have been overseeing the project as far as the soil that was delivered, etc. In terms of the $25,000, Mr. Taylor agrees the Township should not be spending anymore money on the ball field. He mentioned there are bleachers out at Millstone Park on Old Trenton Road that are not being used and asked if it is possible to use those bleachers for the new ball field. Mr. Stout responded if these bleachers are in addition to the ones that are in front of the ball field, then they should be used for the Wright South ball field. Mr. Taylor raised his concern if the ball field is going to be a regulation field there are certain obligations the Township must meet and one of them is having dug outs. Mayor Stave stated it is her recollection that the items still needed for regulation are dug outs, bleachers and a score board. Mr. Cody asked if the fence is ok now. Mayor Stave responded she believes the fence location is fine. Mr. Panconi stated the Township committed to build the ball field and are going to finish it so that the School can use it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu, Aug 27 2009, 9:23 am EDT Post subject: Re: Ballfield Comments from Candidates |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | ... Mr. Panconi stated the Township committed to build the ball field and are going to finish it so that the School can use it. |
Does Cranbury school have a baseball team that needs a regulation sized ball field? (It reads like the school is a "scapegoat" to me).
Why the Township is committed to finish an unpopular (and unnecessary in my opinion) project like this?
How about the future maintenance costs?
The Cranbury School |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bumpkin
Joined: Sat, Aug 1 2009, 8:13 am EDT
Posts: 46
|
| Posted: Thu, Aug 27 2009, 12:51 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Ballfield Comments from Candidates |
|
|
| It is my understanding that the field was intended for Babe Ruth league teams. Has this initiative died on the vine? If it is indeed for Babe Ruth league play, has anyone looked into how many area Babe Ruth teams exist and what plans have been made to have them schedule league games at the field? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu, Aug 27 2009, 2:15 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Ballfield Comments from Candidates |
|
|
| The ball field is not Babe Ruth field any more. It's called "regulation sized" ball field now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu, Aug 27 2009, 6:21 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Ballfield Comments from Candidates |
|
|
| Guest wrote: |
Why the Township is committed to finish an unpopular (and unnecessary in my opinion) project like this?
How about the future maintenance costs?
|
How do you know it is unpopular? The mayor indicated it was a well supported decision at the time and no one seemed to refute that.
Also, what would you have put there instead that would not have had ongoing maintenance costs? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu, Aug 27 2009, 7:04 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Ballfield Comments from Candidates |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | Guest wrote: |
Why the Township is committed to finish an unpopular (and unnecessary in my opinion) project like this?
How about the future maintenance costs?
|
How do you know it is unpopular? The mayor indicated it was a well supported decision at the time and no one seemed to refute that.
Also, what would you have put there instead that would not have had ongoing maintenance costs? |
If you believe what the mayor said, sure. What was he going to say when he pushed for the project (it's not popular, but my kid plays in the Babe Ruth)?
It's obvious that maintaining a regulation sized (e.g., Babe Ruth kind) facility is much more expensive than a field with grass and trees (e.g., my backyard). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joe the plumber
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri, Aug 28 2009, 1:31 am EDT Post subject: Re: Ballfield Comments from Candidates |
|
|
I still like the idea of a semi-pro team in there.
Cranbury Colonials.............I like that name!!!!!!!!!!
Put in some seats, refreshment stand, press box and BINGO we're in business. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Homer
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri, Aug 28 2009, 9:54 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Ballfield Comments from Candidates |
|
|
| Cranbury, NJ- An historic farming community that can't figure out how to grow grass. Doh! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
