2/7/2005 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting February 7, 2005 4,5,6. Now the citizens are being told that in another five years it will go the opposite way. The schools must say that the levy is not only open for them but is open for everyone. A new field house and a new complex is needed, and so is the Rec Center. The surrounding cities, such as Westlake, have a Rec Center, but they do not have indoor tennis courts. The same is true with ice hockey. Hockey has started to take over as a varsity sport in the surrounding suburbs. Midview is voting on it this week; Westlake’s supposed to bring it to the forefront. They will be looking for a place to play (to rent the rink). This also applies to tennis. If you put in another tennis court, there will be more teams that want to use it more than ever. There will be more of a draw if there were five courts. The first part of the puzzle would be the tennis courts, so they would be the first project that would be done, once the money is funded. Mr. Stein said that a big problem is (and he was not saying that the tennis people are wrong) that if the two courts were put in now, they would not be played on. The kids are back there with the skate park. They’ll curse and throw stones; the courts will never be utilized. Any time something has been done, it’s been done halfway. It just won’t work. There will be something done – tennis will get something quickly – but tennis will never see the rest of it. For some reason it never gets done. With Ted (DiSalvo) here it seems that he’s doing things the right way. It may take a little more time. Just do it right. Mr. Gerrity asked what the cost would be to enclose two courts; with a wall and add on more courts after that. Out of the $88,000 mentioned, is there any money left, or is that gone? The tennis people responded that it was all used for other things. It was originally allocated for the North Olmsted Park, so the money had to be spent there; the money was unable to be transferred. There was a commitment in 2002 to build two tennis courts. They were going to be outdoors, unprotected and subject to vandalism, just as any outdoor facility. Everyone has to face up to the idea of vandalism these days. Tennis had the funds. Through no fault of theirs, and the commitment to build the tennis courts, through nobody’s fault, the money was lost and was spent towards other things. Tennis is saying they have a commitment that was made to them. They are now asking for one court, not two. What is now being asked for is if there is any money in the 2005 budget to find $45,000 to put an outdoor court someplace close by, and it will be utilized and be of much benefit. There were three presentations with Tom Stein’s ideas in the past. The public position supports this fact. This has been over a period of approximately 15 years. It looks like the financial picture gets bleaker and bleaker, as well as the general economy, so tennis is doubtful about getting the money. In the meanwhile, at least the tennis program could be improved to a degree. The other thing is that it appears that federal or state funds are not available, so is there any other way there could be funds to improve an outdated facility that needs to be upgraded without going back to the city general fund or the residents? Tennis would like to see something happen next year. They have been patient. They have supported everyone else’s priority. They are talking as taxpayers themselves, and they know what is spent to play tennis. Ted DiSalvo and Tom Stein and others have been sympathetic to their cause and want to take them where they want to get. Tennis commented on the good job that Mr. DiSalvo has done since he’s been here. Page 6