Daily News reporter Joanne Beck paid a visit to Dwyer Stadium yesterday, but she wasn't there for a ball game. She was there to get a closer look at the outfield turf, a plot of grass that has been the center of a controversy over the past week here in Batavia.
At Monday's City Council meeting, Ben Bonarigo stood up and asked the city to let youth football play one more season at Dwyer before it relocated to Kibbe Park at a cost to the city that would not exceed about $19,000. His recommendation was immediately followed by a heated, hour-long debate among Council members, none of whom seemed to agree on even a single detail. (For more details about the meeting and the recommendation by City Manager Jason Molino to relocate the program to Austin Park, check out our two earlier posts.)
At the core of the debate is a simple disagreement between Bonarigo, who is a member of youth football's board of directors, and Council President Charlie Mallow. Bonarigo says that if youth football stays another season at Dwyer, the outfield will suffer no great hurt. Mallow says just the opposite.
Beck writes that if Council approves youth football's request to stay at Dwyer for one more season, "Mallow has no doubt the city will pay another $10,000 next year for field repairs."
We asked Charlie to explain a little more his choice of $10,000 for the city's share of field repair costs. Why that much? He wrote to us in an e-mail:
The city is responsible for the first $10,000. From what I remember it cost the Red Wings $40,000 plus for this season's patch repairs. I expect the city's liabilities to be at least what they were last year. In talking to the baseball people, anything less would not be believable. We can not open ourselves up to escalating costs of field repairs any longer.
Bonarigo countered at the meeting Monday that there is no way youth football would cause so much damage that the city would need to spend that kind of money and that even after the repairs, the field is in the same shape this year as it was last year.
And really, that's what it has come down to: Charlie says this, Bonarigo says that. My question — and I would hope it would be everyone else's question, too — is: Who do we believe?
In Beck's article today, she quotes Muckdogs General Manager Dave Wellenzohn and Red Wings General Manager both saying that Bonarigo is wrong. Wellenzohn says flat out that the "overuse" of the field from youth football "will bring us back to square one," and square one would mean an investment by the city of at least $10,000.
With the quotes from Wellezohn, Mason and Red Wings CEO Naomi Silver, the overall tenor of the article seems very much in support of Charlie's view that: "Council is wasting taxpayer dollars." And it's an argument that should warrant some credence.
Why pay $10,000, $20,000 or even $10 for youth football when that money is not spent on other youth programs, Charlie asks? Why does youth football get special treatment? Or is it special treatment? WBTA seemed to ask the opposite question in their next-day coverage of the meeting Monday: Would one more year of youth football really be that bad?
Unfortunately, Beck also writes that "Bonarigo was unavailable for comment." The Batavian put in a call to Bonarigo's office this morning to take up some of these questions, but he was not in. He should be back later, so we hope to get a comment from him then.
Comments
Pool rules
There is a limit to what the city can afford and what it can force city homeowners to bear. Government isn’t a charity; it doesn’t get its money from the kind hearts of people. It takes what money it needs and threatens to take people’s homes away if they don’t pay up. I fully understand that city government should only take what it needs to help the community as a whole. I have nothing in common with those who believe government should be everything to everybody. Government is bloated and needs to be reined in. Paying for grass at a baseball stadium so kids can rip it up playing football, isn’t a proper use of government.
Charlie, you sound like a Reagan Republican -- good, old fashioned GOP values.
We haven't heard that from a politician since Bill Clinton left office.
The fields that the youth league uses for practice at MacArthur Park are many and empty, for the most part. What's the problem with using those fields? If the games were spread out over a bigger area, it would lessen the wear-and-tear. Isn't there a pavilion that could house a hotdog/hamburger/sausage grill? Sure, its an additional inconvenience. But, the games could run concurrently, and get over before dark, doing away with the necessity for lights. Is it parking? There's about as much as at the west end of Dwyer, isn't there?
Unless the city spends as much on other sports leagues as they do on football, there's a glaring inequity that needs to be addressed.
Children need excercise. They need structure. They need an activity that interests them and will build on as they become adults. I remember growing up playing baseball with neighbor kids, riding my bicycle until the tires wore out,and just being a kid. There were no political figure heads telling me no you can't play here.
Football was not intended to be played on a baseball field. Can you play tennis on a soccer field? Can you bowl in a swimming pool? Football needs to be played on a football field. The Red Wings did this town a huge favor by taking over operations at Dwyer. It would be a shame to compromise what they have done.
These kids need a place to play where it's meant to be played,on a playing field that it built to take the punishment of football.
Do the right thing and show today's youth that problems can be solved constructively,with positive energy. I believe there might be a solution to the problem, but I'm sure someone somewhere will say it can't be done. Why not have them play at Van Detta Stadium? It's meant for football. If not there, figure out somewhere that would be agreeable to everybody. Just plopping a field in some park is not going to solve the problem, it will just add to it. We are adults, we should think like adults and come to a conclusion that works for all.
the muckdogs...City taxpayers put up money to rebuild it..but only out of town ball players can play on it..hmmm..then its time to raise the ticket prices and then those that go can pay the taxpayers back ,so then they can run it as a privite enterprize....mark
As for the ticket prices, the Muckdogs have trouble selling tickets for $6. If we chase out baseball, we end up with an empty park and we still have the debt from the construction.
Our football program in LeRoy starts with the youth teams. Coach Moran and the school realize this only too well and they support these youth programs by giving them the venue to compete and learn the sport. What has it produced? Teams that consistently win sectionals, regionals and challenge for state titles year in and year out.
Youth football, across the area, is played on school fields. I have never gone into a community for youth football where the town or village government own and maintain their own football field. The only rule that I remember the school setting down for the youth program -- was the youth teams could not play before the first LeRoy varsity home game. Big whoop. We always played on Sunday afternoons and the school's maintenance had all week to repair from that weeks contests and get ready for the next weekend.
If I was a parent in Batavia, I would start with a petition drive and end it at the next school board meeting. As someone outside looking in -- that seems to be where this should be fought.
Also, the Redwings put in $40,000 this year and said they can't afford it next year and are expecting the city to pick up the bill in last nights paper.
Have a nice day!
Thanks for listening