March 5, 2012
Editor NJ Herald:
Do the Sparta taxpayers want a sport facility upgrade at $4.583 million? Why are we being presented with this question again? In 2006 the Sparta Superintendent of Schools, Dr. Morton, wanted $2.45 million for field upgrades.
As of December 2011, he was going to do the job with the $3.7 million of leftover building funds.
Now it is up to $4,583,000. It is easy to spend money when you have it. The facts are, we do not have it now. It appears that spending taxpayer money comes quite easily for Sparta's Superintendent Morton. In a worse economy than in 2006, the sports upgrade costs have nearly doubled that of 2006 ($2.133 million higher). Do construction costs increase that quickly or is it simply that the appetite for more has dramatically increased?
Are we being taken for a vindictive financial ride? Here we are in an economy where salaries are down, people are searching for jobs, all of us are being asked to sacrifice economically, every neighborhood is witnessing foreclosures, and yet, this superintendent wants extravagant spending. Do we really need everything that is in this package? Whatever happened to the logic
of needs versus wants?
What kind of thought and analysis has gone into this sport project upgrade?
It is obvious that there is no one with construction experience overseeing this project. What is actually involved? Clearing land, building spectator stands, putting in some electricity and a sound system, and oh yes, the turf field.
The first red flag should be the artificial turf. There is no logic in spending $500,000 on artificial grass that will need replacing in approximately 10 years with another $500,000 repeated cost. In other words, having this turf instead of grass carries a "material only" cost of at least $50,000 a year ... forever! We can buy a lot of sod grass for that money.
Then, of course, the turf will be exposed to the elements, consequently, keeping it free of debris will require constant care and we all know what that is like when you live in a forest area. Of course an investment this large will have to be insured. This is a "soft cost" because the insurance rate is mingled in with other insurance coverage.
The second red flag is an apparent cost of $1,800,000 for blasting rock and excavating in order to bring the land down to the correct level.
This is outrageous and unacceptable! If it costs that much to blast rock and excavate, stone would be selling at more than gold. Thousands of excavating machines are sitting idle, dump truck haulers are selling off their rigs, quarry men have little work and we are still asked to spend $1.8 million to move dirt and rock. Someone has built in a heck of a profit into this job at the taxpayers' expense. Keep in mind that the stone and rock that is removed is not waste, it is sold somewhere down the road by the contractor.
This entire project needs be questioned and re-analyzed as to our real needs, not this pie in the sky, 24-karat gold package. It appears that the Sparta superintendent of schools has given new validity to the phrase "Something is rotten in the state of Denmark."
Phillip Lid
Sparta
