News, sports, politics, blogs and forums for Chanhassen, Minnesota • (952) 934-5045 •  Follow us on Twitter and Facebook

Chanhassen Resident's GuideLocal Worship DirectoryChanhassen Foreclosure Data

Chanhassen, Minnesota

Keep up with the Villager! Sign up for email newsletters and RSS feeds.
Click to Login
No account? Sign up!

Advertising

Advertising

Ballfield partnership on council consent agenda


» Read similar stories filed under:

Approval of the master agreement between the City of Chanhassen and Independent School District 112 regarding use of athletic fields at Chanhassen High School is on the city council consent agenda.

The meeting is scheduled for Monday, July 28, at 7 p.m. The agreement involves a city investment of $600,000 to improve the district's baseball/softball stadium complex. The city investment would come from a surplus of park dedication funds. In return, the city would gain second-priority scheduling for all of the district's new athletic fields.

What's your opinion of this partnership?


Advertisement



A letter to the editor...

Back to page top

A letter to the editor appeared in the July 21 edition of the Chanhassen Villager. See below.

COMMENTARY

Baseball stadium planning is ‘razzle dazzle’

By Mark Senn

School District 112 and the city of Chanhassen are incorporating the sporting practice of “razzle-dazzle” on their latest and greatest idea.

The definition of “razzle-dazzle” in sports refers to making the game or play complex with the intent to confuse. While their overall plan is inappropriate, it is ironic they have chosen this methodology to confuse the taxpayers relating to the new baseball field at the new high school.
First, the school district sought and received approximately $96 million for the new high school and facilities from the taxpayers of School District 112, which only includes about half of Chanhassen but I will come back to that later.

Evidently, even in this tough economy, the school district is not able to live within their meager budget of $96 million, thus devising a plan a couple of months ago to go to the city of Chanhassen, another separate taxing jurisdiction, to get the city to kick in $600,000 of city taxpayer money toward the ball field. The rationale was that more bigger and better stadium bleachers and lights would maybe allow the use of and formation of a town baseball team. Don’t forget the community already has a right to use these facilities since they paid for them.

Town teams are usually put together privately and are supported through contributions, revenues and sponsorships, not the city. A big part of revenue is concessions, including beer sales. While the law allows such on school property with a special permit, how appropriate a message does it send to allow beer sales on school grounds, where, by the way, there is a zero or no-tolerance policy toward the use of tobacco products. What’s wrong with this picture and the common sense of those even suggesting such a thing?

The City Council flatly and appropriately turned them down. Why should funds from the city of Chanhassen taxing authority — whose residents are split between the School District 112 and the Minnetonka School District — go to benefit just School District 112?

This “razzle-dazzle” move intended to confuse the taxpayers failed. I guess the Minnetonka School District should ask for $600,000 for something just to keep things even. If these improvements were a priority for the school district, then the $600,000 should have been incorporated into their already $96 million spending budget. Evidently, the school district and the Chanhassen mayor were not satisfied with this result. So they met to come up with new and different rationale that might make more sense or at least maybe be more popular. The mayor brought the superintendent to a City Council work session not before the cameras or full public view.

Miraculously, this item is back on the Chanhassen City Council agenda for approval on Monday, July 28. By the way, it is under the consent agenda so it means that Mayor proposes it not even be discussed. This is in keeping with what the Villager previously reported that the mayor and School District superintendent made a “political handshake” on the deal and implied or said it was a done deal.

“Razzle-dazzle” once again. I thought we were done with this. I for one can’t wait to see what the new rationale is. It seems kind of funny that the school district, which really seems to want these added improvements for their use without using part of their $96 million, is still trying to come up with rationale for another taxing jurisdiction and keeps changing it until they hit it right, no pun intended.

I am sure it will once again be under the guise of community use of the new high school and facilities even though the community already has that inherent right since they paid for it anyway.
We elect school board members and are supposed to hold them responsible for schools and school spending. We elect city leaders to hold accountable for city services, facilities and spending. How can you hold any of them accountable when they start co-mingling statutory taxing and spending authorities. It’s all “razzle-dazzle to confuse the taxpayers and spend more. The school district should be freely opening their doors to the community to create more community participation.

Call or e-mail your City Council people now before it is too late.

Senn is a Chanhassen resident.


Submitted by FAdams on July 24, 2008 - 11:25am.

Letter to City...

Back to page top

Letter to City Council:

Mayor and Councilors:

While we approve the concept of the city cooperating with the School District on the use of school facilities, we are opposed to an agreement that includes a contribution of $600,000 from the city. That is way too much money to allocate from the city budget. This would increase the city tax and divert money to increase the School District budget.

Regarding the on-site sale and consumption of (alcoholic?) beverages at softball and baseball games, is the motto to be "If you serve it, they will come"? Is it really in the best interest of the public to have a bunch of men and women drinking beer at a family activity?

Opposed to approval,

Jerry & Jan Paulsen
Chanhassen


Submitted by FAdams on July 28, 2008 - 6:27pm.

From Chanhassen Villager...

Back to page top

From Chanhassen Villager story five weeks ago regarding the $600,000 that the city would contribute to the ballfield partnership with District 112.

"[Todd] Hoffman (Chanhassen Parks and Recreation Department) said the money would come from the Park Dedication fund, which currently has a cash balance of about $3.5 million.."


Submitted by FAdams on July 28, 2008 - 6:33pm.

Advertising

Advertising

Recent comments

Advertising

Who's new

  • HoneyI
  • Shamar I
  • kennethlowman
  • Allison678
  • lupusucks

Who's online

There are currently 0 users and 115 guests online.

Advertising

Advertising