SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums Club Soccer & ODP CESA soccer fields mentioned in "Legislators' pet projects"

3/15/07

Legislators’ pet projects no longer guaranteed
http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/16904859.htm
John O'Connor & Aaron Gould Sheinin, The State

Projects paid for
Carolina Elite Soccer Academy soccer fields, Greenville — $100,000
http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/16904860.htm
The State

Disgusting and unfair. Our tax dollars going to benefit a private club. Now CESA gets 100k and it will not be allowed any more so they benefit once again. Ridiculous.

SP
Maybe if they had more soccer fields in Richland County $25,000 of our taxes would have to be used for an anti-graffiti program. Now that's disgusting, unfair and ridiculous.

>>[Soccer Parent] Our tax dollars going to benefit a private club.<<

As I sit here paying ever spiraling property taxes, I have to wonder how much the $100K bothers me when compared to the $6M+ Lexington fields -- which 99.99% of the time may be scheduled only through LUSA -- a consortium of private clubs.

Could we make a deal? I'll pay your and my part of the $100K for the privately built CESA fields; and you pay my part of the $6M+ for the Lexington fields that shows up on my property taxes.

Chico....what is LUSA and what fields are you talking about in Lexington?

I am only aware of baseball and football complexes going up in the newly revamped Ball Park Rd complex....?

CESA is largely synonymous with all soccer in Greenville county (no disrepect to some of the remaining smaller programs). 20 fields between Brushy Creek, MeSA, and Wenwood and whatever at Sunset is simply not enough space for that size of that program. Just look at their competitive teams at U13-U18. Figure 3 teams at each age and gender ... that 36 teams looking to practice on average 3 x per week. Figuring that you can set 2 teams to a field (I know they often place 3 teams on a field) and have two practice time slots per night, that's 9 fields tied up 3 nights a week.

They host games for all ages and levels and accept all comers from the surrounding counties at any level regardless of club. Of course they need more fields. (Now, I'll admit if they (**I mean CESA**, not the state legislatures) invest the money for fields in Columbia or Rock Hill, I'd have something different to say.)

Lexcoach:

(1) LUSA was (is?) the name of the entity which actively manages Lexington's Gibson road complex. It was created to give the four (now three) clubs the ability to schedule the fields while ensuring that outside entities (such as CUFC) were excluded.

2) The fields I'm talking about are the Gibson Road fields.

greengrass: To me, the choice between the "private field model" that we see predominantly in the upstate and the "municipal field model" we see a lot elsewhere in the state is a no-brainer. CESA pays for their multi-million dollar field complexes and then works hard to host tournaments that in turn bring business into their surrounding municipalities, counties, and the state of South Carolina. I was once privy to the financial models and can tell you that the state of South Carolina, and even more the upstate, gets a lot more than they have given in terms of CESA bringing in money.

By the way, the former CSC (now part of CUFC) was the first midstate club I was aware of that pioneered building their own fields. Of course, when Richland County chose to invest to create fields that are effectively managed by the private club, my only reaction was "...hey, those guys are smart...".

While as Emerson noted a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, an unfoolish consistency tends to be the mark of integrity. I'd like to actually see some of these folks who are being critical apply the same degree of consistency to whatever club they like to the clubs that they don't like.

The midstate has a probably equally difficult space problem. Perhaps CUFC, and other clubs in the midstate, together with SCYSA and the state legislature to go after some US soccer foundation money since the foundation seems to be focusing on putting money in areas with large population centers. Get it built, with room for expansion, and work out a deal for CUFC to maintain it.

What is the requirement from a soccer field perspective to host the regionals in South Carolina? It seems that we are always going out west to play.

From the SCYSA Newletter sent out today:

SC Youth Soccer is excited to announce our intention to bid on the 2009 Region III President’s Cup. It has been nearly twelve years since SC Youth Soccer bid on a Regional tournament, and with the assistance of the Carolina Elite Soccer Academy (CESA) we will be doing so again. CESA is experienced in organizing and managing quality tournaments, and they have the soccer “know how” to make this event a truly wonderful experience for Region III teams. SC Youth Soccer sincerely hopes you will be supportive of our bid to bring this event to South Carolina in 2009.

Holy crap, Chico! That is the best Emerson quote around, but I will have to mull a while to see if I like what you did with it. . .

Did SCYSA ask any other club if they were interested in helping with this endevor? If not they should have.
Just like SCYSA should promote other tournaments in the
State and not just the CESA tournament at the end of May.

Columbia is the perfect location for one or even two first class soccer facilites like Manchester Meadows in Rock Hill. Two artificial turf fields capable of supporting year round youth and adult league play at all hours of the day surrounded by beautiful grass fields built at a cost of 14M, excluding the cost of the land would have a huge economic impact on Columbia.

Those complaining about the funding CESA is getting should quit complanining about that and put their drive, creativity and relationships towars the development of such a complex. Is 14M, plus the cost of land really that expensive to create a complex that'll consistently draw teams from all over the southest to the capital city of South Carolina?

This parent thinks not. A couple of weeks ago I posted a comment about building such a complex in Columbia along with a poll to see what level of support there is for development. Since the posting to each forum on this site there have be countless readers of the posting but few votes for or against the development of such a complex in Columbia. Think small time and you'll stay small time. Think big time and who knows . . .

CUFC would be the perfect club to manage such a facility. If you're a Banker, Developers or Buiness owner who supports youth soccer getting behind this initiative should be a no brainer.

Then the CUFC folks should work with neighboring governments to build it. As a York Countian I am jelaous of what you already have in Columbia area.

We now have Manchester.....which is controlled by RH Parks and Rec. Columbia area has 2 very nice facilities in Lexington and Ballentine. If you want a 3rd build it. Jo doubt you can use it.

But....I would be opposed to SCYSA'a funding of it. I would support SCYSA helping from a paperwork/grant writing perspective....opposed to their putting cash into it.

If SCYSA and/or US Soccer is supporting other private clubs the precident has already been establshed. They would have an obligation to be involved financially at some level.

Manchester - I noted from your prior post that you recommend CUFC run any facility built in the Midlands, not Congaree Rapids or LCSC. Why, because CUFC is the predominate club in the Midlands

Soccersmylife - From prior posts I noted that you are likely a Bridge parent or player. If a facility was built in Charleston, let me guess you would be all for Bridge running the new facility, not Summerville or Charleston United.

CESA parents do not spend their time bemoaning the fact that the only professional soccer team in the State of South Carolina right now is located in Charleston. No, we support the Battery and take our kids to matches, because it is good for soccer in the state not just the lowcountry.

Well CESA is the predominate Club in not just the upstate, but the STATE. I think you will find that CESA approached SCYSA about their desire to host a regionals, not the other way around. I get tired of parents from other clubs complaining whenever CESA does something positive for soccer in the state. We all spend countless hours on this board bemoaoning the fact that soccer is not growing in the State of South Carolina and that generally our state is not as strong at the regional level as say North Carolina or Florida. CESA is taking aggressive steps to try and change both of those things. I wish CUFC and Bridge would spend less time taking pot shots at CESA and more time focusing on growing soccer in our state.

BD: Any way they can get more fields built in Cola is a win-win for the state. If SCYSA gets involved in a big way, then I hope they could leverage it in such a way that they could reduce or eliminate field usage fees they pay for when two clubs play a game on a 3rd club's fields. I could see SCYSA turning the fields over to a Cola club for annual operating & maintenance costs with some provision to hold league games, state cups, and ODP events at no cost to the state for the next 10-15 years and let the local club pump the fields for the rest of the year for training, tournaments, and other things to help pay for the annual operating costs.

Man: In terms of number of fields, I would speculate that they need a complex that can handle a minimum of 10 fields, with adequate parking and some sort of concession/restroom facility, but would suggest they consider going for a complex that could handle 20 fields might be more appropriate. So what would that take 50 acres to get started?

If SCYSA wants to get into the seed money business and start an aggressive field campaign I could support that. So long as it benefits everyone in the state and seed money is provided across the state.

Putting fields in Columbia will benefit Columbia kids first and foremost. And while I'm all for Columbia kids....we have field access issues all over the state. Manchester is a fabulous game facility....but tons of kids up here are practicing on outfields of baseball fields.....while Manchester sits empty.

Game fields are great. And if SCYSA wants to invest in a Manchester/Ramblewood game only type facility and locate it in Columbia then great. Fields could also be used for State Cup and ODP.

But I see CESA getting grant money from the State for fields and SCYSA funding a facility in Columbia as totally separate issues. Part of the function of State government is building adequate recreation facilities. Tons of upstate kids play rec soccer at CESA. Unless awash in money, I don't see the role of SCYSA as building complexes, particularly if only 1 Club or region of the state will benefit.

>>[soccersmylife] Did SCYSA ask any other club if they were interested in helping with this endevor? If not they should have.<<

Two scenarios are presented below. It's left to the reader to decide which one is more likely.

Tuesday Morning: Setting, CESA offices. Telephone rings.

Steve Ballentine: "Hello, this is Steve Ballentine, president of the SCYSA. May I speak to Pearse Tormey and Andrew Hyslop?"

Pearse Tormey, Andrew Hyslop: "Hello, this is Pease and Andrew. How ya' doing Steve? How's that golf game?"

Ballentine: "Fine, fine. Look, guys, the reason I'm calling you is that I want CESA to host the Region III regionals for South Carolina. I realize it's a lot of work, but the SCYSA will do the lion's share of all of it and CESA will sit back and rake in the dough. We in South Carolina need to get ambitious -- so we at the SCYSA want CESA to stop hiding its light behind a bushel basket, so to speak, and help lead our state forward. How about it?"

Tormey/Hyslop: "Uhhhh...Steve, it sounds awfully complicated. We're not sure we're the right ones for this."

Ballentine: "Dudes...of course you are! When me and my buddies here at the SCYSA were sitting around and drinking beer the other night, we all asked ourselves just what our favorite club is. And there's no doubt -- it's CESA! We love you guys. We'd do anything for you. Now we're asking that you do something for us."

Tormey/Hyslop: "Steve...it's kinda painful to bring up, but you really screwed us last year when you created those new rules out of thin air with respect to that whole Columbia kerfuffle. Some of us are still a little..."

Ballentine: "Guys, guys...you know it was all an act. We just had to make believe that we were being tough on CESA to get the other clubs off our back. You're our favorite, baby. We love you. We'd do anything for you. We'll never hurt you again. Just give us one more chance, please. You won't be sorry."

Tormey/Hyslop: "We don't know...last time you said you wouldn't hurt us again...and it just seems to happen again and again."

Ballentine: "We love you. We really do. We'll never hurt you again. Let's start over and make it work out. Let's dream big and make this regional event happen."

Tormey/Hyslop: "Okay...we guess we'll give it a try...we love you too..."

--------------------------------------------------
An alternative scenario.

Tormey/Hyslop: "Steve, hey...this is Pearse and Andrew. As you know, we've built a multi-million dollar complex on our own that is privately owned. Based on all of the business we've driven to hotels, restaurants, and the like, we've gotten some local government agencies to agree to dramatically increase the size of our complex by co-locating a municipal field with our existing fields. We now have enough contiguous fields to make a bid to the USYSA to host the Region III tournament. As the state agency, we need your approval. If we do this, the SCYSA won't have to do anything but sign some forms and of course you'll get money. How about it?"

Ballentine: Okay.

>>[soccersmylife] Just like SCYSA should promote other tournaments in the State and not just the CESA tournament at the end of May<<

Ballentine: "Andrew, Pearse...this is Steve again. Look, we've been thinking about it and we want to continue promoting the College Showcase tournament you hold."

Tormey/Hyslop: "Steve, why don't you give some other clubs a chance. We actually feel guilty about this -- we don't do any work, we charge you a huge amount of money, and then we sit back and rake in all of the dollars from this massive enterprise."

Ballentine: "Guys...we don't need any other clubs; we love CESA and we're denying any and all requests to help any other club do anything in this regard."

----------------------------------------
Once again, an alternative scenario.

Tormey/Hyslop: Steve, once again we'd like to invite your ODP teams to our College Showcase tournament in May. We'll issue open invitations to other teams in South Carolina and we'll invite Georgia and other state's ODP teams. Oh...and we won't make a dime off of your ODP teams participating.

Ballentine: I don't know...other clubs might get angry again.

Tormey/Hyslop: Which other clubs?

Ballentine: Well...let's say a club called ABC might get mad.

Tormey/Hyslop: Did ABC come to you guys and offer to try to drive your ODP enrollment higher by hosting an ODP night for all of the surrounding clubs?"

Ballentine: Well...no...

Tormey/Hyslop: Does ABC have an open-enrollment CAP program and older teams in training in the spring?

Ballentine: Well...no...

Tormey/Hyslop: Does ABC even have a College Showcase event?

Ballentine: Well...no....

Tormey/Hyslop: Then why would they be mad?

Ballentine: I just don't want to have to read another 100-page legal complaint. But...okay...we'll do it.

Got you going didn't I? Have a great day!!

My kid's been with two select clubs in her life: one in the midlands and one in the upstate. When she was with the midstate club, I can remember hearing people complain about how biased the SCYSA was with respect to upstate clubs. It took me a while to see through what was being said.

I think your post was great; it gets at the heart of the grumbling that you so often hear on the fields. I enjoyed writing the "scenarios" -- one you think things through, it doesn't take a tremendous amount of insight to see through and illustrate these types of "issues" for what they really are.

>>[Big Daddy] But....I would be opposed to SCYSA'a funding of it. I would support SCYSA helping from a paperwork/grant writing perspective....opposed to their putting cash into it.<<

>>[Manchester] If SCYSA and/or US Soccer is supporting other private clubs the precident has already been establshed. They would have an obligation to be involved financially at some level.<<

No such precedent has been established; the SCYSA has not to the best of my knowledge "given" money to clubs.

Neither has US Club Soccer.

Both are affiliating organizations, which means in essence that they operate by "taxing" clubs. Neither has an "income redistribution" program in which they take from one club and give to another. In short, a precedent for a youth soccer club welfare system has not yet been established.

However, the SCYSA has been looking at building some fields, particularly in the Columbia area. If I were from an area outside of Columbia, I might look somewhat askance at this type of proposal in which the SCYSA raises money from all areas of the state and then builds something that benefits only a single area. You could argue that a better approach would be to "give" money back to clubs so that they could build/expand fields themselves.

But then again, given my idealogic learnings, I'm a lot more comfortable with centralized organizations simply not taxing than I am in their "giving" money back.

Chico,

That's godd to hear regarding SCYSA. As I originally stated, it's as it should be . . . local individuals and their clubs should have a grand vision for youth and adult soccer within their select communities. Columbia is unique in that it is right in the middle of the state and has a growing, professional club (CUFC) capable of managing a top flight complex like Manchester Meadows. How about a USL PDL team in Columbia like the Silvernacks in Atlanta or those found in multiple cities throughout the US? Well, that would require a central location and a fantastic complex like Manchester Meadows. Columbia area fans need to get off their duffs and make this happen!

Great ideas, Manchester. And I agree that Columbia area fans need to get off their duffs to make it happen.

That sounds sarcastic and its not meant to. I just don't like the idea of SCYSA collecting money on a statewide basis and then using it in such a way that directly benefits 1 region or CLub over another.

Precisely, SCYSA is there to provide structure not financing. Private clubs demand private initiatives that benefit private industry resulting in a stronger community. Wow! I must be a Republican! All kidding aside, Columbia is the perfect location for a high growth SC soccer initiative.

Anywhere lots of kids are......is a great place for a soccer initiative!!!!

Not sure I know of anywhere that lack of fields isn't a problem...its simply to what degree.

Big Daddy, no doubt about that!

5/13/07

Spending on local projects shoots up
http://www.thestate.com/426/story/62546.html
The State

5/2/07

A bean museum or a tax cut? If only it were that simple
http://www.thestate.com/143/story/52468.html
The State

3/20/07

With no real criteria, the grants applications came flooding in
http://www.thestate.com/143/story/17007.html
The State

Below are the field requirements for regionals as cut and pasted from this year's regional tournament website...

A. Playing Sites
1. Fields:
· A minimum of 16 fields is required to host.
· Field sizes will be coordinated with RTC.
· All fields will be marked according to FIFA guidelines.
· All fields will be marked prior to the beginning of the tournament and at least one or more time during the tournament if deemed necessary by the RTC.
· Nets, corner flags and markings are the responsibility of the LOC.

2. Trailers:
· Separate trailers will be brought in if needed, as determined by the RTC.
The headquarters trailer will have a copier, office supplies, one (1) phone line and air conditioning. An adequate number of tables and chairs must be provided. The referee trailer must also be air conditioned.

3. Tents:
· Two 20’ x 40’ tents should be available for the referees, along with an adequate number of tables and chairs.

It is preferred that the fields be located at a single site. If multiple sites are necessary, a reasonable distance between playing sites would be expected.

The playing venues should ideally be no more than 30 minutes driving time from team lodging. The site(s) must have good access from major highways in the area and ample parking space for teams, administrators, referees and spectators.

Adequate practice fields, separate from the playing pitches to be used for the tournament, shall be available for all participating teams. These practice fields should be in close proximity to the teams’ lodging facilities.

The State investing in CESA is money in the bank for SC. Giving CESA $100k is a drop in the bucket for what CESA will replenish the tax base back in tax money. SC should be falling all over itself to give money to all the well established and organized clubs in SC. The growth of youth sports in SC is a great way to raise tax money from people that you would normally never be able to get money from in the first place. I am not saying that you give money to just any club but the ones that are well established and organized such as CESA should be given money to help grow their program, which then benefits SC. The main reason for the fracturing in the midlands has been the county recreational groups that have no reason to grow their sports but just want the tax money. When was the last time you saw a county recreational group put on a soccer tournament to raise money. And we all know that the money raise by the club is a little percentage of what the local businesses make off that tournament.

I remember fighting with the local rec group because they told I was not allowed to use their fields because the rec teams had them and since my daughter played club I don't qualify to use them. I tried to explain that I pay the same taxes as the rec parents but it didn't seem to phase him. This is the reason CSC owns it's fields.

SCYSA offers zero seed money to the clubs. And they have only talked about getting fields in Columbia, not to benefit any Columbia teams but for the Greenville, Charleston matches that always seem to have problems scheduling on very busy Columbia fields. Again Columbia teams would continue to use their fields and receive zero benefit from this plan. But this is just talk and will probably never happen because of the cost of purchasing land in the midlands big enough for fields is just to expensive.

OOOO yeah pay for our feilds

DDrogba9: My guess is that you don't pay much in the way of taxes.

Coach P: I'd like to see the SCYSA use a market-based system such that clubs "owning" fields are paid a higher rate for usage so that the clubs themselves can invest that money into either maintenance or field expansion.

How much does SCYSA pay for field usage now? (I assume $0 for matches where one of the teams is from the club that owns the field, and what something like $30-$50 for a neutral match, i.e., CESA vs Bridge at Columbia)

1st of all the annoucement regarding the 2009 Presidents Cup is for Classic level Teams, not the RegionIII Tournament