To the editor:
I am still not clear on the problem of recreation spending in this county. In the newspaper we read “Fairfield County will seek an engineering firm or similar firm well versed in recreation projects and related matters to serve as a consultant to oversee projects in each district”. Will those consulting fees come from the $3.5 million? What will be legitimate spending from the $3.5 million dollars? Land purchase? Land preparation and grading? Equipment? Bricks and mortar buildings? Staffing? Maintenance? Are these items part of the total amount or will they add to the burden on the taxpayers of Fairfield County?
When the total amount is spent will there be continual requisitions for more money to complete the projects similar with the situation with Drawdy Park? Will competent professional recreational consultants make the decisions? Who will be accountable for reviewing part or the entire plan and how often?
I submit the idea of one large sports complex where interstate and intrastate tournaments could also be held. The county has the room, natural resources, transportation potential with I-77 and other roadways. In addition to fulfilling the need for constituent recreation, this complex would have the option to charge entrance fees and generate lodging and food income. This plan is economic development and would provide local jobs.
I am distressed that all this money is being discussed for recreational needs of residents but also to be considered is the physical health of residents of all ages. If Council feels an interest in their play time they certainly should feel an interest in their health. Presently over 300 indigent clients are served per month in the emergency room at Fairfield Memorial Hospital. No one is ever turned down for the lack of payment but council only allows $942,673/year for that. It doesn’t seem fair.