162 replies to this topic

[Judge Smails]

It wold be ironic if Folsom had to play their soccer games at Vista.

[dimeracer]

Here's a new aerial shot of the field. Note the soccer field lines.  .facebook_1544191380.jpg   96.62K   52 downloads

[AMETHYST PRODUCTIVITY]

There are no words for how awful that looks. JMHO.

[ducky]

I'm just thankful our colors aren't orange & black.

[giacomo]

There are no words for how awful that looks. JMHO.

It just looks so gimmicky.

[The Average Joe]

Looks terrible in the aerial shot. I also wonder if the blue color will fade faster than green. Overall, a silly, expensive decision by those involved. But hey, it's not their money...

[SacKen]

Wow. That is hideous.

 

Frankly, I don't care where the money came from, it should be considered income to be used for any needs in the schools. My kid just started Kindergarten. It's the first time I get to experience this joke of a public school system myself. The teachers can't even print things out because they are given one ink cartridge to last the year. They only get $150 for supplies for the entire year. The district just expects parents to cover the rest.

 

The effing taxes I already paid are supposed to cover the rest.

 

And how much was spent on this field? *sigh*

[ducky]

I know I'll be remembering this when they want me to vote for a bond measure.

[supermom]

Here's a new aerial shot of the field. Note the soccer field lines..facebook_1544191380.jpg

It reminds me of bubblegum for some reason.

[dimeracer]

The take I get from all of the wasteful spending comments is that we shouldn't have a football field. These turfs wear out eventually, and need to be replaced, if not now eventually. The expected lifespan was up. The blue color did not cost any more than green would have, at least based on one supplier website. Grass fields arguably cost more over the long run with watering and maintenance than synthetic fields. Every new high school that puts in a new football/ soccer field seems to be going the direction of synthetic. Correct me if I'm wrong on any of this. Note: I am not a Bulldog parent or in any way affiliated with the school or program. My kid plays soccer. I'm just being devil's advocate here.

[ducky]

The take I get from all of the wasteful spending comments is that we shouldn't have a football field. These turfs wear out eventually, and need to be replaced, if not now eventually. The expected lifespan was up. The blue color did not cost any more than green would have, at least based on one supplier website. Grass fields arguably cost more over the long run with watering and maintenance than synthetic fields. Every new high school that puts in a new football/ soccer field seems to be going the direction of synthetic. Correct me if I'm wrong on any of this. Note: I am not a Bulldog parent or in any way affiliated with the school or program. My kid plays soccer. I'm just being devil's advocate here.

 

I'm certainly not saying we shouldn't have a football field.  I have no basis to say it wasn't time to replace the synthetic turf.  I haven't seen any official confirmation that the blue turf did NOT cost more than green turf.  I also haven't seen any numbers for the special underlayment that was used or if it was any different than what Cordova's field got.   I know school board members have read this and you would think if that weren't true they'd quickly correct the misconception.  The numbers used in The Folsom Telegraph article don't match up with what was budgeted.

 

The special CUSHdrain used at FHS is supposed to drain more quickly and prevent injury.  I suppose the drainage issue would be important if Folsom had one.  I don't remember there being any problem with the old turf in that respect.  I wouldn't have a problem with a turf underlayment that is supposed to prevent injuries such as concussions, especially since it is supposed to be a multipurpose field for things such as soccer where they don't wear helmets, but if that can't be proven scientifically then the school paid extra for a gimmick.

 

It keeps being said that the money from the cell tower rental was earmarked for this purpose, but was that a law or a choice?  If they can make an exception to borrow from the cell tower fund to fill a budget gap, they could certainly use excess to go to other school district needs.

[Rich_T]

Once money is earmarked, it WILL get spent on that thing.  The way I read the original article, the blue color was a luxury, and the logical conclusion is that having a blue field comes at the expense of funding other things such as teacher supplies, the cost of which is instead externalized to parents who already pay taxes on property and on bonds.  There may be hard-to-quantify benefits of having blue turf ("pride"?), but it remains a fair question whether those presumed benefits outweigh the real financial cost.