The last Town Council meeting was packed with more residents than anyone in attendance could remember. The overwhelming majority were there to show their support for proposed projects concerning the condition of the municipal tennis courts. The meeting began at 8pm and ended somewhere in the neighborhood of 11pm with close to 2 hours being devoted to public comment on the tennis courts.
Tennis Debate
Court 6
Mayor Szabo took a few minutes to discuss the logistics required in allowing all those present to speak, and requested whenever possible for folks to perhaps allow several representatives to provide a voice for the many others in attendance. Interest in the proposed project has increased as changes in the plan have led to estimations rising from the original 250k to potentially 950k. The national economic crisis, the defeated school budgets, and outrage over NJ’s tax burden have created an environment that makes funding of project of a matter of debate in the community.
Steve Wagoner, chairman of the Recreation Commission, began to make the case for the town to consider funding the project as he presented a powerpoint presentation. It began with a brief overview of the Recreation Commission, its structure, and its fiscally prudent administration which has allowed Oakland to boast an exceptional recreation program with minimal cost to the borough. Over the last two years, the Recreation Commission brought in about $280,000 through donations of either cash or donations of labor such as that provided by the Potash family and other volunteers;and,the 2008 budget for recreation was close to that same number. The Recreation Commission, administrators, and coaches are all volunteers, and they elicit donations from various civic groups such as the Sports Association, The Mother’s Club and the Father’s Club, as well as corporate and small business sponsors. They also raise revenue through nominal registration fees and field rentals; and, maintain a Recreation Trust fund that is used for capital improvements and added to through user fees. Proponents of the proposal believe that grant money will substantially reduce the town’s investment, and the money invested will eventually be paid back over the life of the new courts through user fees; potentially becoming a source of additional revenue.
Closed tennis courts
The council is faced with difficult decisions. The tennis court project has the backing of some of the town’s most involved volunteers whose personal commitment of time and resources to the community has no dollar amount, but they will also be struggling with a budget that will be greatly impacted by increased cuts in “state aid”. Mayor Szabo put forth for consideration a scaled back project with an estimated cost of 660,000. This proposal would not include repositioning the courts or replacing the foundation, but it would improve lighting and correct the surface conditions. The need for the council to come to a resolution appears to be heightened by the recent closing of several courts due to a deterioration that caused the DPW to determine they were a hazard.
Kathy Fahey, a leader in both the Mother’s Club and Sports Authority, asked that the council give the proposal serious consideration. The proposed project that calls for a repositioning of the courts would improve the parking situation and allow for fuller development of the Danny D building. She referred to corrective action taken on the courts several years ago, and believes the council should deliberate carefully before choosing a band aid approach that might just require further investment down the road. She was joined by several other representatives of the community, including an 80 year old resident who took on the job or repairing cracks himself in the courts’ surface, who promoted the investment as a benefit to the entire community irregardless of whether they play tennis or not. They presented the case that the tennis facilities bring an added value to the town, and in return to the value of individual homes.
The most compelling plea for fiscally conservative action came from Howard Wegman who’s sobering editorial on the subject was published in the Suburban News. Summarizing the letter, which appeared the same day as the meeting, he acknowledged the importance and benefits of the tennis courts; but, laid out the case that the project began last year with a price tag of $250, 000 and rose to an estimated cost of $950,000. Mr. Wegman’s belief is that the tennis courts are used by a small percentage of the population, and the council has to carefully weigh what sacrifices must be made by the larger community in order to fund the expanded project.
Other opponents who were present at the meeting included Frank Monaco and Mike Rose. Expressing deep respect and appreciation for the volunteer work which makes Oakland a special town, they felt the present economic situation made it difficult to invest so heavily in the project. Mr. Monaco believed it disrespectful for the town to be considering investing almost a million dollars while other members of the community are facing foreclosures on their homes in a steadily worsening economic environment. He also was dismayed that the council chambers were packed for a discussion on this subject but remain relatively empty as the town faces other important issues. Mr. Monaco proposed that expenditures of this size should be put on the ballot for a voter referendum. Mike Rose reiterated the instability of the economy, and offered the suggestion that perhaps a compromise could be found in a more narrow project proposal.
Considering the sincere passions on both sides of the subject, the meeting maintained a civility that gave those in attendance, and those watching the broadcast courtesy of the Communications Commission, a fuller picture of the projects pros and cons. Both proponents and opponents offered well thought out arguments, with only an occasionally uncalled for comment coming from both sides of the dais.
Sewer/Water Rates
Another topic, sewer rate increases, was also addressed. This topic was discussed briefly as it has resulted in some commercial/retail establishments seeing dramatic increases. Council members Burns and Stagg both noted some objections to the process, and the council in general agreed that the subject needs to be reviewed with regards to fairness for 2009. The one business owner in attendance has a small management business with only a few employees, and he felt it was intrinsically unfair that he is now paying 300% (three hundred percent) more for a small business with minimal water/sewer usage. He questioned the council as to who was paying less if he was now paying so much more.
Smoking Ordinance
The other item on the agenda, addressed after the tennis project debate, involved passage of the new smoking regulation. The new ordinance prohibits smoking in Oakland parks and recreational facilities, and creates a smoke free zone around Oakland schools to prohibit underage smoking. The ordinance has been under discussion for several months in response to students stepping off school property to smoke. The ordinance passed after the lengthy recitation of statistics compiled by council member Pignatelli indicating smoking is dangerous to your health.