Fate of Fields Plan Uncertain After Special BOE Session

At a hastily announced Tuesday Parsippany Board of Education field improvements meeting at the administration building, Superintendent of Schools LeRoy wanted to make something very clear to members of the school board.

"On Thursday you are not settling on a completed plan," he said. "You are simply voting on forwarding [a plan] to the Department of Education for review."

By the gathering's end, residents didn't seem reassured, but rather, divided on the issue, and it was not clear what type of fields plan would be acceptable to a  majority of voters or whether a referendum had a chance of passage.

The special session served as a final opportunity for Seitz to clarify the options available for upgrading athletic facilities at Parsippany and Parsippany Hills high schools. The clock is ticking for the board and its plan to put a referendum before voters asking them to spend up to $11.5 million for the improvements—in order to qualify for a January referendum, the BOE must send that plan to the school education department by Thursday.

The gathering also afforded members of the public a chance to speak their piece on the controversial idea, which has received some criticism about the price tag and about residents' quality of life issues.

Many in town expected Seitz would present a drastically different proposal from the .  That didn't happen.

The superintendent suggested maintaining six-lane track ovals at the high schools rather than expanding them to eight lanes, which he said would cut about $900,000 from the that includes artificial turf fields, Americans with Disabilities Act-compliant grandstands, lighting, concession stands and more.

That would cut the taxpayer cost to install the entire list of options from an estimated $54 to $45 per year for 10 years.

"It's less expensive to do everything in total rather than piece by piece," Seitz told the board.

The superintendent addressed a number of citizen concerns that were expressed at the last board meeting.

Regarding the existing bleachers, which are not ADA compliant, he asserted the importance of having facilities be accessible to all.

"ADA compliance is not just a ramp into the bleachers," he explained. "Individuals have to be able to get down the field and from the parking lot to the field without obstruction."

In answer to those who complained that having home and visiting team dressing facilities and public restrooms are an extravagance taxpayers can't afford, he superintendent reiterated that the locker rooms in mind are merely basic cement block structures with hooks on the walls. And he said that having restrooms are more appropriate than often less than sanitary portable toilets.

To those opposed to a water cannon, a cooling system for synthetic turf fields, Seitz aruged that the device "is necessary."

"Without it, the field will get too hot and players will be pulled off the field,: he cautioned, adding that a storm water management system is also "essential."

He suggested breaking the plan down between two questions on the referendum ballot. The first would cover the fields, tracks, lights and bleachers; the second would address locker rooms, concession stands, rest rooms and a sound system. Voters could vote yes to both, split their vote or vote both questions down.

If voters ultimately reject the referendum questions in January, Seitz warned the residents in attendance that there would still be a cost.

"If the referendum fails, we've spent $30,000 [for the election] and have to start from scratch," he said. "We [still] need to fix the fields. There is a cost if we do nothing." 

He said the costs for items that are needed even if the referendum goes down—bleacher repairs, new lights, turf fields—would have to come out of the school operating budget.

"What does the board want to do and what does the [state-mandated] 2 percent [tax levy] cap allow?" the superintendent asked. "Those are two separate things."

Board President Frank Calabria underscored Seitz's message.

"This is not binding the board to anything" at this point, he said.

A long line of residents then took turns sharing a wide variety of opinions regarding the necessity of various improvement options, the process by which the architectural firm was chosen and the conditions of the fields, fences and facilities. 

Most citizens did demonstrate common ground: Many in attendance said they could not imagine Parsippany voters agreeing to anything that costs $11 million.

Thursday's meeting takes place at the BOE building, 292 Parsippany Road at 7 p.m.