Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Jay Littleton Ballpark topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and preservationists urge council to save Jay Littleton Ballpark; concerns raised about Scout House and Grove Plaza
Summary
Multiple residents, heritage advocates and youth organizations urged the Ontario City Council to preserve Jay Littleton Ballpark and the adjacent Rotary Scout House, criticized limited community outreach on redevelopment plans, and requested a comprehensive staff presentation before any decision.
Dozens of residents and community stakeholders urged the City Council to preserve Jay Littleton Ballpark and to avoid replacing the historic wooden field with a splash pad or a privately run facility that could restrict access.
Ken Braithwaite, representing Little League District 23, described the burned grandstand’s local and film-related history and urged the city to rebuild the ballpark as a community and revenue asset. “A rebuilt Jay Littleton can host more than baseball,” Braithwaite said, noting tournaments, ceremonies and potential hospitality revenue.
Gloria Jones of Ontario Heritage called the site a “living time capsule” and warned that replacing the wooden ballpark would erase an uncommon historical and cinematic link. Charlene Littleton, the daughter of Jay Littleton, asked the council for a clear date for a vote and requested a detailed cost breakdown, saying the community needs specifics about design and seats rather than speculation.
Several speakers raised related concerns: Joe Vlietstra (Cherry Rotary) and David Austin (Scoutmaster, Troop 301) said the four proposed plansshown to the public appear to replace a long-standing Rotary Scout House (built 1950) with parking; they urged the council to consider alternatives that retain the Scout House. Resident Monica Ibarra described safety and maintenance problems at nearby Grove Plaza and said poor lighting and boarded storefronts depress the area and deter retailers.
Speakers repeatedly criticized the city’s outreach timeline—calling the required 72-hour notice inadequate for meaningful neighborhood engagement—and urged staff to consult residents directly in District 3 and other neighborhoods. Mayor and staff responded that the ballpark would be placed on a future agenda and that staff would prepare a comprehensive presentation for council consideration.
The council did not take immediate action on the ballpark during the meeting; public comment closed and the item was scheduled for a future agenda with a staff presentation requested.
