Jamestown leaders debate $1.7M recreation bond as community pushes $900,000 Eldridge Field upgrade

Jamestown town councilors, residents and volunteers debated whether to include a $900,000 Eldridge Field package within a broader $1.7 million recreation bond during the council's March meeting, with public speakers and councilors urging immediate field repairs while other members asked for more detail on deed restrictions, phased spending and budget impacts.

The debate centered on three immediate priorities: restoring playable grass and drainage at Eldridge Field; addressing deteriorated locker rooms and showers at Lawn Avenue School; and determining whether to fund new pickleball/tennis courts and other amenities. Proponents argued the field is the island's primary grass-sports asset and that upgrades would give youth teams and adult leagues safe, usable space. Opponents and some councilors said the package needs clearer design, permitting and cost breakdowns before voters consider borrowing.

Why it matters: The recreation bond would be part of a larger capital plan the council may bring to a Financial Town Meeting. If approved by voters and later executed, bond proceeds would be borrowed and paid back over time; however, councilors and the town administrator said the council can delay actual borrowing (and the related debt service) until project designs, permits and permitting approvals are in hand.

Speakers at the meeting pressed for different priorities. Jay Sisson, president of Jamestown Soccer, described long-standing field problems and previous engineering estimates, saying, "Kids wanna play. Kids wanna play in a safe environment." Justin Sroton, a former Jamestown Soccer competitive director, told the council that Eldridge is the only viable grass field on the island and that flooding and poor drainage mean the town cancels practices and games after rain. Resident Patrick Gaines urged investment in North End recreation to serve families there. Mary Lou Sanborn, speaking for the Taxpayers Association, urged fiscal caution and suggested delaying or cutting some bond items, citing rising assessments and town costs.

Council and staff responses and next steps - Ed Mello, town administrator, and staff reiterated that some work can proceed without extensive ground disturbance (grading, adding sand base, drainage crowns and temporary improvements), while other items (bathrooms, permanent concessions/storage, major parking changes or water/irrigation) may trigger deed restrictions, state permits or federal reviews. The town has previously engaged Rhode Island Historic Preservation and DOT about deed conditions on the Eldridge parcel and has not completed all required Phase 2 archaeological work; any major ground-disturbing work could require additional Section 106 consultation tied to federal or state funding.

- The council discussed packaging flexibility: councilors may authorize a dollar ceiling for a bond and later choose which components to execute, rather than commit to immediate full borrowing. Staff said voter authorization of a bond does not require the town to draw funds immediately; debt service would affect the town budget only once the bond is executed and funds are drawn.

- Several councilors signaled support for starting with lower-risk improvements that do not require extensive excavation (field grading, drainage, turf improvements, retractable protective netting), while deferring permanent structures and major parking reconfigurations until deed issues and state approvals are resolved.

Budget and bond context The proposed recreation bond figure discussed at the meeting was $1.7 million. Councilors and commenters also referenced other bond packages under consideration: a roughly $3.8 million facilities-and-equipment bond and a potential $3 million affordable-housing bond (the latter not yet on the council's agenda). The town administrator noted the budget is at the 4% tax cap; if the council moves forward with additional debt and elects to execute it in the coming fiscal year, the additional debt service could push the town toward seeking relief or requiring cuts elsewhere. Town staff recommended clarifying timing: authorization to borrow is not the same as immediate debt service, which arises only when the municipality executes the borrowing.

Community concerns and trade-offs Some residents asked that bond components be separable on the ballot so voters can accept or reject parts (for example, playgrounds or pickleball courts versus field restoration). Staff explained that because of issuance costs (bond counsel, placement fees), smaller separate bond measures may raise per-issue costs; the council can choose how to package warrants for the Financial Town Meeting.

Several speakers emphasized equity of use: while soccer drew many supporters, residential taxpayers who rarely use fields asked the council to explain broader recreational benefits and revenues, if any. School committee funding was discussed: a councilor asked the school committee to identify $200,000 toward locker-room/Long Avenue School work to reduce the town share of costs.

Ending Councilors agreed to return to the issue at a budget workshop on March 25 (scheduled by the council) to refine numbers and language for any warrant articles, to pursue necessary archaeological/permitting steps for Eldridge where appropriate, and to present a clearer, itemized bond package for public review prior to any vote.