Well, just when the entire county, from Mt. Airy to the suburbs of greater Burtonsville, thought that turfed high school stadium fields would be a luxury not seen in these lifetimes, comes this proposal from County Executive Ken Ulman. Basically, the funds for the turf fields at all 12 county high schools would come from the Department of recreation and Parks, while the replacement costs for the fields (they need to be replaced about every 12 years, apparently) would be split by Rec and Parks and the Howard County Public School System.
OK, so I get why initially state funding was sought for this project-- after all, why should the county pay for something the state can pay for? But does the Rec and Parks budget really have the approximately $700,000 per year in its budget (the cost total is $4 million, and the fields are scheduled to be installed over 6 years) to support the field construction? Or... is this new funding to the Rec and Parks budget starting with FY13 in July? The article is sketchy on the details, but I suspect the latter.
I support the installation of the turf fields for a number of reasons-- the long-term maintenance costs are less, turf fields are safer than grass, the fields could be used much more heavily than they are now, for three-- but I need to know more about the funding stream on this before I can wrap my arms around this one. I am especially concerned about a project that spans more than one local administration. What if, in year 2 or year 6 of this process, there's a change in local administration, and the new Exec/Council/School Board don't feel so warm and fuzzy about turfed school fields? Then we could have as few as 2, or as many as 8, schools holding the bag without turf fields. Which then leads to complaints about inequity between schools, and well, you know the rest.
Looking forward to seeing this one unfolding. But for now-- more information, please.
Comments