I agree,,, increased access for all athletics should be the goal. Hopefully that is what happens. Hopefully our town/county/school district is not
In the business of picking winners and losers when dealing with athletics. I don’t think a tax payer should be forced to pick one private entity over another to have access to public land. Equality should be the goal.
I get what you are saying, but municipalities do it all the time. As a taxpayer, I have no say on what news channels are shown at airports. The municipality and news org enter into a contract. No different here. Why should any organization that has control of land enter into an agreement with a municipality that forces them to give up there one and only advantage?
CSC did not have enter into the TIF. The YMCA didn’t. Both sides entered in a way that was mutually beneficial. The club gets improved facilities. The Town (and tax payers) gets increased access to recreational facilities.
Clamoring for increased club options at that location misses the point. Taxpayers support Gahagan. Where the soccer fields there? Taxpayers support the baseball/softball complex at Westscott. Again soccer taxpayers derive no benefit. There are winners and losers every time. Kids have options. The Y, DUSC are examples that play nearby.
I have yet to see a valid argument about why CSC should enter into this agreement and no longer remain sole proprietor of soccer at a facility they currently are. I get it, you see taxes paid and want open access across the board. Not going to happen. In this case, both sides benefit. Both gain something and both lose something.
