Players will come if Babe Ruth field is built

[Guest]

Another one. Just FYI:

Players will come if Babe Ruth field is built

Thursday, October 23, 2008 4:28 PM EDT

Betty and Leo Fenity, Cranbury

In 2002, a letter to the editor suggested serious consideration be given to providing a regulation-size baseball field for Babe Ruth baseball in Cranbury.

Reasons for the original recommendation:

1. Tennis courts and a regulation baseball field behind David Wells’ Antiques on Main Street were eliminated to make room for affordable housing. While new tennis courts were built, the ball field was never replaced.

2. The new field would be contiguous to the school property and would allow the students to play on it during physical education classes. After school, the boys’ baseball team could practice and also their home games on it.

3. There is a quality Little League field in Village Park. At age 13, players can play Babe Ruth, which requires a regulation field. The new field would provide a missing link.

4. If Cranbury students are to become a part of the athletic teams at Princeton High School, it is important they acquire the basic skills at the Cranbury School. The difference can mean making the team, sitting on the bench or being cut. Also, making a team could mean an athletic scholarship for college.

For several years, members of the Township Committee reviewed the new ball field. The ability to get county grants to assist with the costs was a real plus and Cranbury School officials indicated they would use the field. Accordingly, planning began.

We should give a note of thanks to the committee; it has been able to obtain grants to cover the costs.

Unfortunately, the field has been a target for opponents with negative comments and half-truths. A recent example was reference to a “‘multimillion dollar’ Babe Ruth baseball field on the Wright South property.” On Sept. 19, the township administrator said that the new field has cost $374,478 so far, not including the recently approved cost of $19,000. She also said the project has been funded by two separate county grants, for $400,000 and $74,000.

It’s true that additional work needs to be done prior to the use of the field, but it is our understanding that, if needed, additional grants will be requested to cover those costs.

As for whether the field will be used, school officials say the current plan is for boys in grades sixth through eight to use the field when it becomes available. The boys have been playing on the girls’ softball field on the school grounds while the girls play on the softball field in Village Park. Availability of the new field will allow the girls to return to the school site.

We note with interest that just to the west of the new Babe Ruth field is a corn field, bringing to mind the 1989 movie “Field of Dreams.” It told the story ofa baseball field built in a cornfield in Iowa. Famous ghostly players emerged to play baseball with the owner. A recognized line from the movie is, “If you build it, they will come.”

Betty and Leo Fenity
Cranbury

http://www.packetonline.com/articles/2008/10/23/cranbury_press/your_views/doc4900de1068ff0296877344.txt

[Guest]

This is so annoying. This letter says basically, if you question spending you're using it for political gain, so we shouldn't question spending. The kids are playing on the School team they don't have to play Babe Ruth to develop skills and the Babe ruth league is Cranbury/Princeton so the odds of a team with a majority of Princeton players coming to Cranbury to play a game is minimal. We have 0 kids on babe ruth today, that can be backed up by calling the league office.

In terms of the grant, the first grant was to be used for benches, scoreboard, etc... So now we're asking for a second grant to cover the expenses that the first grant should have covered. So this letter writer chooses to ignore the fact that the biggest costs are yet unfunded on the hope a grant will be issued. And not to worry. Well, I do worry because $500,000 plus to fund the remaining portions could come from my taxes here in Cranbury. If it was 100% covered by grants this person would have an argument, but until then this is a valid concern, whether they like it or not.

I wish people were as concerned with looking at the whole spending as opposed to saying it is political if you disagree with the TC spending money.

I personally feel, the TC has gone down the spending road so far that the hard core supporters in town are now struggling to justify the actions of the TC and upset that people are paying attention to spending. They are writing letters because they know the TC spending is out of control, but want it to continue because they support the individuals on the TC or benefit from the pet projects. Last week, a writer wrote talking about how financially responsible the TC has been, but ignored the revaluation and the 7% rise in municipal taxes.

[Guest]

My guess is the letter writers were told what to write. I think Stout and his cronies are organizing the letter writing campaign about this and those previously saying what a great job the TC is doing and how there supposedly haven't been any controversial spending proposals, etc... It's pretty transparent.