Letter: Consultants’ Approach To High School Track And Playing Fields Has Become A Boondoggle

There are two problems that this one project is trying to address, and it’s causing a situation where a ‘perfect solution’ to both is delaying or preventing a good enough solution to either (or both separately).

Problem 1: the track needs to be resurfaced

Problem 2: field hockey and lacrosse (and ultimate and soccer and perhaps other sports to a lesser degree due to the nature of those sports) have had to put up with substandard field conditions for decades

The design consultant hired to write a report on the fields situation instead created a bigger problem (politically) by trying to solve both issues with one solution, and creating an overpriced boondoggle of a project. Simply resurfacing the existing track would cost $100 to $200K. Building a new artificial turf field costs somewhere between $650,000 and $1,200,000.

Instead of wasting $15,000 on the consultant, a group of coaches and the current and former AD could have solved both problems for under $1 million. Instead they have overreached and created a politically unsupported project, and prevented either of the original problems from being solved anytime soon.

The original track, built in 2000, was designed to be resurfaced after 10 years. Why was that not done? It’s now gone over 200% of its design lifespan. Instead of budgeting for appropriate regular maintenance of existing facilities, leaders have aimed for pie-in-the-sky overspending on new unnecessary building, as they have with the Jones Library.

I would consider that a failure of leadership, but it seems like it’s par for the course and the general concept of this way of “budgeting” for “capital projects” is just the way things are done nowadays, and supported by the majority of elected and appointed officials and the voting public.

Except when they’re not.

Eric Nazar

Eric Nazar is a former ARHS track coach