Weather | Beachcam
Login | Contact Us | Staff | Site Map | Archives | Alerts | Electronic Edition | Subscribe to the paper

HomeNewsLocal News

Oxnard grapples with spending millions on park baseball complex


Download Podcast  Download this story as a podcast!
Order Photos

Costs to build a privately operated baseball-softball complex in Oxnard's College Park would run taxpayers $27.2 million — about $5 million more than if the city built and ran the facility.

The costlier scenario, however, is an "economically superior alternative, saving the city approximately $125,000 to $500,000 a year" in operational costs, according to a staff report.

Released Thursday on the city's Web site, the report confirms figures cited by Councilman Tim Flynn, who tried but was unable to get the report earlier, through a public records request and then a lawsuit filed against the city last week.

The City Council will discuss the matter at a study session Tuesday. Council members are expected to advise staff members on how to proceed with the plan but not take any action.

The City Council commissioned the $293,500 consultant report to narrow down cost estimates for developing College Park, a 75-acre parcel at Channel Islands Boulevard and Rose Avenue.

A key question is whether Chino-based Big League Dreams should build and operate the complex, or if the city should handle it.

Big League Dreams offers taxpayers a better deal because the company would assume all operational costs in running the facility, City Manager Ed Sotelo said Friday.

"Our cost is zero with Big League Dreams and significant with the city-run operation," Sotelo said.

Big League Dreams constructs replicas of famous ball parks. The city has already paid the company $505,200 for a consulting agreement and an additional $400,000 for a licensing agreement. The latter fee is refundable if the city decides that the project is not financially sound or cannot use some of the land because of restrictions imposed by federal funds, officials have said.

Regardless of the scenario — public or private — taxpayers foot the construction bill.

City staff members originally estimated costs for a privately run operation at $15.2 million.

Sotelo cited the dramatic price run-up for wood, steel and concrete.

There is a nearly 79 percent difference in material costs between the staff's estimate and the report's projection.

Softball and baseball tournaments will pump an estimated $2 million a year into the city's economy, the report says. The figure is based on a combined 640 youth and adult teams with 7,900 people using the complex.

Each player is expected to generate about $260 per weekend, figuring in hotels, restaurants and other expenses.

Flynn, the lone councilman to vote against last year's agreement with Big League Dreams, said Friday the report is incomplete because it doesn't provide any projections on revenue.

"I think it's highly speculative as to whether it's plus or minus for the city," Flynn said.

City staff members will present some revenue projections Tuesday, but more would come after the council gives a firm idea on how to proceed.

The first phase calls for spending $14.2 million for basketball and volleyball courts, soccer fields, rest rooms, picnic areas and a dog park.

But the city only has about $5.2 million in grant money for the work.

The city could issue bonds and take on debt, or it could seek various grant funds.

Discussions

Posted by just_a_thought on July 14, 2007 at 7:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Don't forget to factor in a few thousand for graffiti removal and garbage pick-up......

Posted by Ventura22 on July 14, 2007 at 8:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Thats a LOT of money for a baseball park. I don't think it's responsible to spend that kind of money when so many other areas in the city need attention. If it is going to be a privately managed facility, why is the city going to spend money on it; just let a private company pay to build it, then they can run it. If big league dreams and the baseball nuts want it, they can pay for it, not the city!

Posted by desdave on July 14, 2007 at 2:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This has sounded like a waste of money from the first time it was brought up. How about sell the land to someone to develop and run if a baseball field is what they want? That way we don't end up having to pay for another bad decision. How about using the money to refurbish the existing city parks? Once more the city counsel seems to see big bucks coming into the city from something that will end up costing us money year after year, with little benefit to the local residents.

Posted by talkback on July 14, 2007 at 10:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It was a bad idea when it was first brought up and it still is. How about spending the money on cleaning up the city, it looks horrible. How about the graffiti crew using the right paint so after it's painted over it doesn't look like a patched quilt. That amount of money can buy alot of paint and maybe have the city spend on picking up trash from the side of the roads (all the roads).

Posted by uknowho on July 17, 2007 at 9:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Everyone complains about something but if they build this complex I bet each and everyone of you on here complaining about it will show up there one day to watch your child or grandchildren or family member play there. Then you can sit back and say I didn't want this built!

Posted by NUKEM on July 17, 2007 at 7:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

When are the city council people going to learn? Every time they spend taxpayer money on what should be spent by the private sector, the taxpayers lose. President Reagan said it best, "Don't look for government to solve the problems, government IS the problem." Besides, Oxnard is going to need the money to pay off all the lawsuits caused by their constant blunders.

Posted by stnerhno on July 24, 2007 at 3:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)

To pxh.18.....the city is not "investing in, and annually paying for, leisure amenities to enhance the quality of life of its residents," (nice line).....it is paying for recreation for tourist from other parts of the state. Read what the paper says......It is investing in the tourist trade.



Discuss this article
(Requires free registration.)

Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.

Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.

We do not allow the following:

  • Posts that degrade others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation or disability.
  • Disparaging remarks, abusive language or obscene comments.
  • Threats, whether obvious or veiled.

We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.

Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.

Username:

Password:
(Forgotten your password?)

Your Turn:

Loading videos... If you don't see them shortly, you may need to download the Flash Player.