Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board weighs resurfacing vs. new tennis courts; interim fix estimated at about $80,000
Summary
Board reviewed options for middle- and high-school tennis courts after recent match cancellations and parent concerns. Staff reported resurfacing one court was previously quoted around $60K and is likely closer to $80K now; building 6 new courts at each school was estimated previously at roughly $625,000 per site.
The Cumberland County Board of Education received an update on tennis facilities after parents raised safety and playability concerns.
District staff told the board that Stone Memorial High School currently fields matches but only has five usable courts ready for play because one court lacked a net; middle-school matches have been held at Stone Memorial while Cumberland County High School lacks usable courts. Parents are asking for long-term facilities at both schools.
Staff presented a range of options:
- Resurfacing the existing Stone Memorial courts as an interim fix. Staff said resurfacing one court had been quoted roughly $60,000 several years ago and, accounting for increases, a current estimate of about $80,000 per resurfacing was being used as a planning figure. That would be an interim fix expected to last several years if a contractor provided a workmanship guarantee; board members asked staff to seek a contractor guarantee for a five-year period and to check whether the resurfacing could be "touched up" annually to extend life.
- Building six new tournament-quality courts at each high school. Staff said an earlier estimate listed about $625,000 per site for full new court construction; members noted the full replacement cost for both schools would be substantially larger (on the order of multiple hundreds of thousands to over $1 million) and that new construction would require bid, engineering and county approvals and likely could not be completed before next spring season.
Board members asked staff to pursue multiple follow-up items: obtain updated bids for resurfacing three- and four-court configurations, check whether courts can be constructed in phases (e.g., 4 courts now and add 2 later) and determine whether lighting is feasible or required for tournaments; staff also agreed to contact Tennessee Risk Management to ask what entity might certify a surface as playable and to check liability implications.
Staff recommended an interim resurfacing so teams can play on a safe surface while the board considers long-term options. Board members discussed whether the fund balance could cover resurfacing this year or whether a budget amendment or county commission approval would be required. Staff said resurfacing would likely come from the general fund (fund balance) and that, before recommending using fund balance, they needed firm contractor prices and an estimate of impact on other capital priorities. Several board members favored a phased approach: resurfacing first to secure safe play, then developing a longer-range plan for permanent courts in stages.
Board members also asked for a cost comparison of three- and four-court options and whether courts at Stone Memorial and CCHS could be shared while new construction proceeds. Staff agreed to gather updated bids, check shared-use options with nearby facilities, and present revised cost estimates and a funding plan at the next meeting.
