Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Aynor Practice Field topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board weighs community-donated Aynor practice field; staff stresses engineering, permitting and procurement safeguards

Owerrey County Board of Education Facilities Committee · September 23, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Trustees discussed a community-offered donated project near Aynor and staff emphasized district standards: civil-engineer-led design, wetland/permitting review, irrigation and safety requirements; trustees agreed to a follow-up meeting with the donor, principal and staff to clarify scope and costs.

A community volunteer offered to develop land near Aynor for a practice field or green space, and the Facilities Committee on Sept. 23 heard staff advice on how the district would handle such an offer.

Joe Burch told trustees the district typically requires a licensed civil engineer under contract to prepare designs and file permits on behalf of the district. "We typically would prefer a civil engineer be hired under our contract so that they work for us," Burch said, explaining that the engineer provides verification services in the field and ensures compliance with zoning, stormwater, wetland and Corps of Engineers permitting when needed.

Burch outlined the practical requirements that drive cost: excavation to depth (he cited as much as 24 inches), select fill, drainage work, irrigation, lighting, and safety features. He said building a practice field to district specifications can be costly—citing a recent secondary-game field build as a reference point—and warned that lower-specification work or donated materials can create liability and long-term maintenance problems for the district.

Board members asked that staff convene a meeting with the donor, the high-school principal and relevant trustees so both parties can discuss requirements and expectations. Trustee Shanda Allen requested a multi‑party meeting to avoid putting a single staff member on the spot and to make all expectations transparent.

One board member said the donor had previously spoken of an estimated contribution described in the transcript as "between the $2.50, 3 50," and noted that estimate dated from about a year ago and costs have risen since then. Staff declined to confirm any exact donation amount in the meeting and said procurement, insurance, bonding and possible tax considerations should be addressed in the follow-up meeting.

Burch also cautioned that combining donated materials and district funds creates procurement complications. "When you have a donation like this and you try to couple it with district money, it doesn't work real well because there's no competitive nature associated with the district funds," he said, outlining challenges in soliciting contractors to perform work when materials are donated but labor or additional district funds are required.

Next steps: Trustees agreed to schedule a meeting with the donor, principal and district staff to review designs, costs, procurement implications and any tax or donation conditions before moving forward.