Lawrence Schools Superintendent Randy Weseman will discuss with readers the district’s thoughts on the future the high schools’ outdoor athletic facilities. The chat follows a school board meeting Monday at which the board will discuss the topic.

Moderator

Hi folks! I’m Joel Mathis, managing editor for convergence. Randy has joined us and is ready to take questions; we’ve already got a few, but we’ll take more — fire away!

Randy Weseman

Let’s get started Joel…

wildcat86

I’m a 2005 Free State Graduate who was in the band all three years and played soccer for one year. I know Lawrence High has limited options for different fields on the property while Free State has pretty much all of their sport fields covered. Why not just improve these fields that the schools already have and try to figure out how to create options on the schools’ properties rather then build a sports complex somewhere in town where both schools would have to travel “across town” in order to play?

Randy Weseman

This idea is one that is being considered. We will present the school board with upgrades and renovations similar in concept to what you have generally described.

merrill

How is this different from PLAY? How will USD 497 pay for it? Where will the money come from to manage it? Won’t concessions be expensive?

Why not spend money on teacher salaries to Blue Valley standards and/or additional Vo-Tech instead? After all there are more students in the class rooms than in athletic events.

Randy Weseman

Capitol funds (funds levied for equipment and building maintenance) by law cannot be used for general fund issue expenditures such as teacher salaries, books and consumable items. The PLAY group produced a study funded by the city, county and USD that examined a wide range of athletic facility needs. We have taken some of the PLAY results that directly impact the school district and integrated them into our discussion. Regarding funding options…..we have an existing cap/fund levy that we use for maintaining and upgrading buildings. Funding could also come from a financial vehicle called “performance contracting” that allows funds to be borrowed over a 20 year period when energy costs can be alleviated. For instance, if you apply artificial turf on a soccer field you alleviate the maintenance requirements of water, mowing, cultivation etc. Therefore, money saved by not doing these things is transposed into facility improvement. If the school board opts for a larger plan then it will need to consider asking the community for bond support which requires an election/referendum.

Moderator

By the way, here’s today’s story about Monday night’s school board meeting on this topic.

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2007/oct/23/district_fields_facility_options/

Clickker

I keep seeing the word “Tradition” in the discussion for facilities. I am all for tradition, but are we letting this get in the way of improvements? Is LHS going to be stuck in the past in the name of Tradition?

Randy Weseman

I guess this depends on your view of the world. I think it’s fair to say that LHS takes pride in its programs, in this instance, 75 years of playing at Haskell. If you are not a part of that tradition then you might have a different view. I certainly support them and their traditions. That being said, I don’t believe that “tradition” is inhibiting change. I believe that the LHS community supports improvements and will support a variety of options regarding the renovation of existing or new facilities.

Hepburn

The Olathe District has two sports complexes which have accomadated high school expansion. Topeka’s Hummer Park is tremendous. Why not build facilities at a neutral location with baseball, softball, football, soccer, tennis and track venues?

Randy Weseman

This option is also under consideration. As you have stated, many communities have taken this approach. I do know that the complexes you refer to also enjoyed private support in terms of land donation and private money. There was also some support from local government. If the Lawrence community indicates to the school board that it wants a sports complex then perhaps a broader coalition of support should be formed. Short of that, the school board must face the prospect of funding the full weight of building and maintaining a major facility and infrastructure.

commuter

I personally do not support the school district bankrolling this district complex without private money being raised. Is their a plan to have private money as a part of the funding. Personally, I am really getting tired of my taxes going up, school fees (which haven’t been reduced in ages), and all this talk about sports. Does the district account for income and expeditures on a sport by sport basis? Or at all? Why hasn’t the district published how much it pays for sports and other extracurricular activities?

Randy Weseman

The first part of your question was answered in my last response, Any expenditures for activities can be acquired by asking for a copy of our budget (832-5000). I think the expenditure is somewhere around a million $$. This would be somewhat reduced by revenue from some events.

bucks1

Has the school district been in conversations with LPRD regarding these potential facilities? Is it the districts wishes to partner with LPRD?

Randy Weseman

Our facility director sits on the LPRD community committee. They are aware of our discussions and option reviews. We would welcome any form of partnership from LPRD or the city.

consumer1

Thanks for taking my question, I am curious where the money to fund such a venture would come from since the School can’t afford to repair the building structures and systems? When we see the school begging for money and then spending out of control on uneccesary items, one tends to think we have been hoodwinked.

Randy Weseman

I reviewed the sources of funding in a past question. If you are referring to a “sports complex” venture then most of the money would probably have to come from a bond. It depends on how aggressive the board would want to be in adding structures to a complex site. If you had the property and started with a football/soccer combination then you could maybe get by without a major infusion of capitol. Your question is a good one in that you are correct in identifying that there are also other, non-sport related, areas that require attention. We have a large number of facilities, many over 60 years old. They require maintenance. Because of the limited levy for maintenance, most school districts use bonds to keep pace. The last bond cleaned up about 75% of the backlog. For now, we will continue to chip away at the remaining items.

Moderator

Finally, Randy: What else should people know about this process? What’s the timeline for making decisions?

Randy Weseman

There is no firm time line. I suspect we will start by bringing the board a plan to address the gender equity issues that have surfaced with regard to federal requirements for equity of sport venues. I expect to have this to the board by November. Other concepts will require some study and information gathering. We need to involve more people in the discussion and, ultimately, the board will need to engage the larger community. The board indicated that it wanted a long term fix, allowing for short term benchmarks……..done in the most cost-effective manner possible. No small task my friend.

Moderator

Thanks for joining us today.