RutlandHerald.com - We Are Vermont

Groups float Giorgetti expansion idea



Giorgetti Arena in Rutland on Monday evening.

Cassandra Hotaling / Rutland Herald
Toolbox

By Cristina Kumka Staff Writer - Published: September 22, 2009

The Rutland Recreation Department and the Boys & Girls Club of Rutland County are looking for a new home in Giorgetti Park and come March, both organizations might ask for the public's help to do it — in the form of a $3 million to $5 million taxpayer-approved bond to expand the athletic complex to include administrative offices and a community center.

Officials from both organizations and members of the city's Board of Aldermen converged at the Dana Recreation Center at 39 East Center St. Monday night to announce their joint plan — to ask voters for "a cent for the center," or a one-penny increase on the city tax rate, to renovate, upgrade and expand the park's current ice rink and skate park.

Tagged the "Community Center @ Giorgetti Park," the plan is for both organizations to run youth programs out of the complex, share administrative space, build exercise rooms for the public, a fieldhouse for indoor sports for all ages and a walking / jogging track, among other features.

An air-inflated facility or "bubble" will be built at the northwest side of the current facility and more parking would be built where the playground is now, according to EJay Bishop, superintendent of the Rutland Recreation & Parks Department.

The playing fields would be preserved and new activities would be offered — a possible landing dock for kayaks and mountain biking trips in neighboring Pine Hill Park.

The project would likely be exempt from the environmental permitting process and maintenance on the property would be covered by an endowment from the late Mary Giorgetti, Bishop said.

The Recreation Department would leave the Dana Center and the Boys & Girls Club would vacate its Merchants Row location.

To make it happen, officials say Rutland taxpayers may be asked next year, through a question on the ballot, to approve a $17 increase on their tax bills if they own a home valued at the city average of $160,000.

The tax increase would generate $100,000 a year toward paying off the municipal bond, matched with $100,000 funding from the Boys & Girls Club and increased program revenues, according to Bishop and Larry Bayle, executive director of the Boys & Girls Club.

The total cost of the project is approximately $4 million.

"This upgrade will allow for recreation activities with increased hours of operation and we would be able to have a multipurpose room, walking/jogging track and an indoor arena for basketball, football, hockey, lacrosse and soccer," Bayle said during Monday's announcement.

The proposal is both new and recycled — it came out of a consistent sharing of services among the two organizations and last year's plan for The Community Recreation and Aquatics Center at The Giorgetti Athletic Complex, according to Bishop.

That plan, for a new $23 million structure on the property, was turned down by Mendon residents in September of last year and the city Recreation Department put the plan on hold to solicit more city support.

On Monday, city officials resoundingly offered nods of approval.

Board of Aldermen President David Allaire said the latest proposal for expansion made economic sense.

Board Member William Notte said it was a way to keep youth tied to the city.

"There's so much potential here … a world of options," he said. "Where kids don't say the sooner we can get out of (Rutland) the better."

Board Member Tom DePoy said he toured other rural community centers and didn't see transportation or a move out of downtown being a problem for the Boys & Girls Club.

"I see it as (the organizations) saying it's going to be a big enhancement to what's going on, more fresh air and open space, get (youth) out where the grass is, where the trees are and they will have a different experience," DePoy said.

Bishop and Bayle said youth would be bused to the new facility and other transportation partnerships with the school district and public transportation officials would be explored.

Mayor Christopher Louras said it would be up to the public to make the center a reality.

"It's not a question of prioritizing one project over another as far as initiating ballot questions is concerned," Louras said.

"Though I support this project, it will ultimately be up to the taxpayers to decide. If approved, it will help position the city to better recover from these challenging economic times."

Reporter Stephanie Peters contributed to this report.

cristina.kumka@rutlandherald.com








READER COMMENTS


Hey Just Outoftyme I cant believe the BOA and the Mayor would allow the part time fire fighters into the union,they all should be scared about thier jobs with almost less then 16,000 in population and we still have a fulltime dept.I know we will be seeing a huge cut in work force at GE soon about 200 workers they already told us.
-- Posted by Rich C on Wed, Sep 23, 2009, 7:34 pm EST

report this comment


I live near this park the trafic has been much worse since they moved RAHA to the park. Cescent st. has never been paved properly since they started to fix water lines 2 years ago. There is no side walk. Kids are costantly forced into the street and any time there is police car screaming down this street I take note of where my children are. I like the idea but need to see where the infrastructure is going to be addressed. I for one have great concerns about trafic issues that already exist say nothing about new ones!
-- Posted by Frank Westcott on Wed, Sep 23, 2009, 1:46 pm EST

report this comment


While it is true that good parenting helps kids to stay on the right track, the Boys and Girls Club of America was not founded for those children. It is an organization aimed at the children who lack adult supervision or positive role models in the home; for kids whose parents work two jobs, or whom have disabilities and maybe can't take them hiking or bike riding, or cannot afford activities like skiing or golf. In their current facility, they could not hope to have enough activities to entice the kids off the street who need guidance and motivation. This would give them more empowerment to be able to drum up interest. What we've seen in our area is a steady decline in children under the age of 18, as young families have little incentive to raise their children here. If you want to live in a growing community we need support for more activities for our youth.
Voting down these types of projects speaks volumes to the kids who hang out in the parks and say, "told you so, this place sucks". Anything we can do to change that mentality will have a positive influence on our city for future generations.
-- Posted by concerned citizen on Wed, Sep 23, 2009, 11:20 am EST

report this comment


Rich C - Here you want more, it's gets better. Oh that's right nothing from the Herald, the Mayor or the BOA on this subject. So the Fire Dept. is forcing (allowing) all part time employees to become union members. Why has this not been published or talked about yet? Just what we need, more union members, sorry Ed.

You know before we had a Fire Union, we had 244 memeber volunteer fire dept. They funded it mostly by fund raisers and gala's throughout the year. I'm saying we need an all volunteer fire department, but we should be opposing our part-time members becoming unionized. We should be filling positions with professional volunteers who are trained the same as our part-timers. Just some thoughts!

Where is that economic development plan?
-- Posted by Just Outoftyme on Wed, Sep 23, 2009, 8:54 am EST

report this comment


Hey Just Outoftyme this will not fly with the taxpayers, we are all struggling now trying to pay property taxes, if the Mayor would cut some departments ( dpw and fire dept we might be able to fund it. Dpw buget should be cut 400,000 and fire should be about the same, the unions are really hurting rutland city.
-- Posted by Rich C on Tue, Sep 22, 2009, 10:11 pm EST

report this comment


Concerned Citizen...what a dolt.

There ARE plenty of things kids can do for free to be active and productive. The library is one my children have enjoyed for a very long time. Playing outside, enjoying the outdoors, going with us (THE PARENTS) for hikes, scouting deer, learning to hunt, fishing in any number of lakes, skateboarding, bike riding and any number of things one can think of...for FREE (except for adult licensing when required by law.) PARENTAL INTERACTION is what keeps kids out of trouble and you by no means have to pay one red cent for that.

Those who are hanging at Depot park, breaking into cars, spray painting buildings and getting into trouble have absolutely NO intention of using a rec program for any purpose to begin with.

It's not the CITY'S responsibility for raising the children in this city...it's the PARENTS who are responsible and not stepping up to the plate.
-- Posted by T R on Tue, Sep 22, 2009, 10:01 pm EST

report this comment


I hate to say this, but I think Rutland has seen it's last good day. Back when, we had outdoor ice skating, no charge, a roller skating rink, 2 movie theaters,
10 and 12 cents, paromont was more expensive.?? but always a double feature, plus cartoons.lots of down town shops, Fishmans, 5 and 10, and so many more, it was such a fun place to live three ice skating rinks, all of which were walked to.
one round pool, 2 for 1 sewards ice cream on Wed eve. so save. I really feel bad for the kids today, WHAT IS THERE TO DO?????????????? duh !!
-- Posted by carole jean shackleford None on Tue, Sep 22, 2009, 9:07 pm EST

report this comment


Now we have a Rec budget (approx. 2 million)that receives almost as much as the Fire Dept. Sure you can say there are some revenues, $600,000 - this dept. is still a burden on the struggling people of Rutland. This would be a great idea if we didn't have the highest unemployment in the state and had some decent paying jobs around here.

Do we remember when the Rec dept. was staffed by two people on top of the hill on Center St? With a very minimal budget, how did they get by back then. I agree with ED, let's take Rutland back - to a time when people in City gov't were fiscally responsible. Intead we have our city money designated for economic development and redevelopment focused on growing our housing for people on the public dole and trying to relocate a perfectly good Library. Where are our priorities???????????? That is the question! Our elected officials can't even work on the City Master Plan - they leave it to the Planning Commission, huh?

If Rutland is to ever change people need to pull their head out of their ass and get informed about what is going on and the scams consantly being formed behind the scenes in City Hall and other City money funded offices. Enough is enough.

I will not support this until I see a comprehensive plan put forth for how we will achieve economic growth and development. This should be the only priority at this point. I think it's time to resurface, and start holding officials accountable again.....


Concerned citizen - my kids will not be those ones, because I raise my kids, not the streets - it's called parenting.
-- Posted by Just Outoftyme on Tue, Sep 22, 2009, 8:36 pm EST

report this comment


Fewer ended up in trouble because there were things to do that encouraged participation, not only for youth but adults as well who demonstrated an interested in what their children did. I believe I pointed out a number of issues that may result in voter rejection of this latest effort, unless those issues are addressed. You cannot live in the past but an attempt to re-establish that contact and value system is what I am implying. One can be marginalized and sit on the fence; or one can take a position and work for change. Pointing out positives and negatives in an attempt by a City Department to appropriate our dollars is in my belief requisite of citizenship, so we can all make the appropriate decision at the polls. Provided this issue ever gets that far. Effective stewardship of this or any municipality is recognizing your past and believing there can be a future. Marginal attitude results in marginal belief that things can change. I am sure there will be numerous suggestions as to how to fund this particular proposal; the least popular of which is a tax increase. My focus has and will be on positive change that provides incentive for retention of population, economic growth and personal security. Some of those areas incur a cost. If one remembers the way things were for our children; then one should certainly be suggesting methods to return to that era. There would be a lot of support from me toward that goal.
-- Posted by Ed Larson on Tue, Sep 22, 2009, 1:41 pm EST

report this comment


This is one Department that always acts like money grows on trees. Always slipping the hand into the taxpayer's pocket.

Mr.Larson always seems to want to go back "to the way things were in Rutland", to go back to yesterday. Well, in those yesterdays children didn't have the city as babysitter ...and fewer ended up in serious trouble then than they do now.
-- Posted by Marginalized Voices on Tue, Sep 22, 2009, 1:04 pm EST

report this comment


The project outwardly does have merit; provided that instrasture improvements are part of the overall plan, not just in the park but outside the boundary lines. These would include but not be limited to sidewalk development in the area so people going to the facility would not have to walk on roadways, traffic flow improvement, noise abatement programs, security and lighting issues, water and sewer improvement and environmental concerns over the increased usage of a sensitive area. It should also involve neighbors concerns relative to hours of operation, traffic enforcement and localized issues. If the taxpayers are to fund the project via bonding; will Rutland City taxpayers receive a discount usage fee; or in the case of those who have minimal income free usage. Selling Dana would most likely benefit the taxpayers as other existing programs there could expand, or hopfeully some functional private usage of that facility come to fruition. Having the Recreation and Parks Offices at the focal point of the bicycle path and Pine Hill Recreation Park has it's merits as this may reduce vandalism and misuse of a City Park. The current suggestion is far less than the Regional Recreation Facility that discarded by so many communities. The potential does exist for marked improvement in the recreational activities for not only youth, but those who pay the bills as well. Work out the bugs now before the cost accelerates beyond what is affordable. A consolidation of youth services is a much better alternative than the other alternative. No services at all. It may also stimulate our youth to travel the bike path to it's end at the College where ties and bonding to a community are part of the continuing education into adulthood. Some people remember the way things were in Rutland, and still believe they can be!
-- Posted by Ed Larson on Tue, Sep 22, 2009, 12:47 pm EST

report this comment


"My kids can find plenty of recreation for free around the city." They can? Does it involve cooking crack, retail theft or shopping cart races?!
If you vote not to fund this great idea, don't complain to the city when kids spray paint your building, or break into your car, or hang out in Depot Park scaring away visitors. This city severely lacks in expanding activities for kids.
-- Posted by concerned citizen on Tue, Sep 22, 2009, 12:39 pm EST

report this comment


So why can we not do this without an increase to the tax rate? EJ (Rec Dept.)lost two staffers in the last round of budget cuts (one is still suing the city). Another 14 bodies are expected to be cut the coming year.

Where will the staff come from the maintain this and staff it? Increased revenues(taxes, shared sacrifice, revenue enhancer) We all know the poor little children won't have to pay to play, I will. My kids can find plenty of recreation for free around the city. Why not market whats already here for the public to enjoy? This is nothing more than trying to bring on my staff and justifying their existance.

Again bring in a private enterprise, like a YMCA, if they deem it not profitable then why should taxpayers be placed with another burden upon themselves.

PS - Oh, I love how the Mayor can take a stance on this issue - classic!
-- Posted by Just Outoftyme on Tue, Sep 22, 2009, 8:39 am EST

report this comment


It's amazing that they think this monstrosity can be built in such a small cramped space and actually "benefit" the neighborhood.

Another increase in traffic, speeders and reckless drivers on very short, narrow streets, an influx of kids who aren't being watched running around the neighborhood doing whatever they feel like. Ever see them running around downtown dodging cars as they romp across the intersection of West Street and Merchants Row without a single adult around? And, yet again...an increase in property taxes.

It's not the kids who are saying "The sooner we can get out of Rutland the better." It's the ADULTS who are sick and tired of not being listened to and paying the continual tax hikes. A recreation center is NOT going to keep kids here. JOBS and affordable living is.
-- Posted by T R on Tue, Sep 22, 2009, 8:19 am EST

report this comment


Dunno. Have you called to ask them about that?
-- Posted by None None on Tue, Sep 22, 2009, 8:02 am EST

report this comment


When is the last time you saw the Boys & Girls club open for business during the summer, you know when kids are doing nothing all day? Just a question?
-- Posted by Just Outoftyme on Tue, Sep 22, 2009, 7:24 am EST

report this comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Register | Log In

Logout