Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Project topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board declines two‑year lease proposal for privately built Hiawatha softball/baseball field; considers shorter buy‑in
Summary
Community boosters described a privately funded $1.2–1.5M field and proposed lease options; after extended debate the board rejected a two-year $30,000/year option 4–3 and continued discussion about a shorter, lower‑cost lease to let kids play while the district evaluates budget impacts.
Representatives of a community booster group told the Hiawatha school board that a privately organized project had delivered a new baseball/softball complex at a reported cost of roughly $1.2–$1.5 million and asked the district to adopt a lease arrangement that would provide a modest district contribution while guaranteeing student access and allowing periodic renegotiation.
The boosters offered two primary options: a two‑year lease (option one) at $30,000 per year for 2026 and 2027, with renegotiations capped thereafter, and a five‑year lease at $25,000 per year. The boosters said their original capital ask had been larger (about 15% of the project) but they had reduced it to the modest annual use payments to align with school funding realities. Booster president Ryan Lonnie Brown told the board the community contributed roughly $800,000 and the completed project would have cost substantially more if built entirely by the district.
Board members questioned which budget line would cover recurring payments, whether turf depreciation and future replacement obligations were adequately funded, and whether a multi‑year commitment was prudent amid declining enrollment and uncertain state funding. One member recommended a one‑year lease near $11,000–$13,000 to cover immediate insurance/maintenance obligations and to buy the district time to evaluate capital outlay tradeoffs; another argued the district should accept a larger near‑term payment to reduce future obligations.
A motion to accept option one (two‑year lease at $30,000 per year) was moved and seconded and failed on a voice vote, 4–3. Board discussion continued about a counterproposal for a one‑year lease at $13,000 to allow play to begin while the board studies the district budget; boosters reiterated that the field will be finished and used regardless of district participation, and said they seek district buy‑in primarily for community unity and shared recognition.
Board members also raised parity and access concerns, noting that the field corrects a decades‑long lack of a regulation softball field for girls and enables the district to host substate events. The board did not finalize a long‑term lease during the meeting and left further negotiation and budget analysis for a future session.
