The only word I could think of after reading Pete Borden's terms of settlement in the artificial turf suit against the Cobb school district was "silliness." A plan to use SPLOST funds to actually lay turf on parking lots or indoor classrooms is acceptable to Borden, but not on an outdoor field. The use of $12.8 million to lay turf and park on it is his idea of a serious settlement to a serious problem facing our county? And to Borden, rejecting this offer shows the county isn't serious. Does Judge White, who granted the injunction, still find Borden serious?
Borden's attorney claimed the use of SPLOST funds designated for turf fields was improper. But now we read that laying turf in a parking lot or a classroom is a totally acceptable use for Borden. Obviously this non-serious proposal was meant to make a point. However, all Cobb citizens should read the article as the curtain being pulled back on a silly and negligent objection to a proper and certified election result. How can anyone or any court take Borden seriously, based on such a ridiculous settlement proposal, or rule that he truly has the best interest of the county and its students in mind? His actions make a mockery of our county. Borden evidently feels he can waste the county's and student's time with such silliness and no one will suffer.
Athletic fields are multi-purpose facilities. PE, Band, athletic teams, school classes, and school wide assemblies all use school athletic fields. In truth, all facilities on school grounds are multi-purpose facilities, used by primary education and after school extracurricular activities: gyms, fields, theatres, shops, lunch rooms, even classrooms. The use of a facility for additional purposes after school hours does not render it unacceptable. If so, we would have to tear down a majority of the school facilities based on their after-hours use.
The use of the fields by football, for which Borden obviously has a dislike, is just one of seven sports that use that field. Actually football plays the fewest number of games on the field. Further, the fields are used by more than just the high school, as grades 5 through 12 use high school fields, when they are physically suitable for use. I am surprised at the lack of concern by Borden for the physical, outdoor, and cardiovascular development of our children during physical education. Where does he believe that school activity should occur - in and around parked cars in the full school parking lots?
With his second condition, Borden may think he is clever demanding no striping of fields; I suppose all the striping of gym floors for basketball and volleyball should be removed as well? Should the simulated football field stripping in the school parking lots used for after school band practice be similarly removed?
It is a travesty that one person can countermand the will of the voters who approved the installation of facilities that were clearly and specifically described in the SPLOST materials.
This all may be funny to Borden, but our facilities and students suffer while he wastes our time and resources.
Bob McLeod
Marietta
Follow us on Twitter!
Sports are just as important as the arts in schooling - we pay for the arts - we should pay for the sports.
Especially with the overweight society we have - kids is sports are busy and less likely to participate in drugs and illegal activity.
I see both sides of the turf issue - if it is illegal to pay out of SPLOST then it shouldn't come out of SPLOST - just like teacher salaries. But if it is not illegal - then turf the fields and get it overwith.
Please tell us what extra-cirricular sport your kid plays and why you think the taxpayers should pay for the field the your kid plays on? You can pay for it yourself, or let the kid play on the grass. Stop trying to be self-righteous while you fleece the taxpayers.