Thisguy1 said:

---

Has there been an announcement on if the fields will be turf?

The local select baseball scene has grown tremendously in the past few years. 20ish years ago there was 1, maybe 2 local teams. Now there's too many to count and every program has 1-3 teams for every age group. It's no longer a summer season. It's year round. There's always been an issue with finding bigger fields. Our HS teams played more playoff games in Mumford than in town.

This is all outside of the Bombers paying for it for a period of the year. It will stay booked if you allow it.

---

Thisguy1 said:

---

Has there been an announcement on if the fields will be turf?

The local select baseball scene has grown tremendously in the past few years. 20ish years ago there was 1, maybe 2 local teams. Now there's too many to count and every program has 1-3 teams for every age group. It's no longer a summer season. It's year round. There's always been an issue with finding bigger fields. Our HS teams played more playoff games in Mumford than in town.

This is all outside of the Bombers paying for it for a period of the year. It will stay booked if you allow it.

---

Mr.Short-termMemory said:

---

BiochemAg97 said:

---

Looking at the bombers schedule, they are "home"almost every weekend in June and July and some mid weeks too. Seems like it could be difficult to host a travel ball tournament during those months.

Also, while a number of teams at the travel ball tournament could be local, there is likely a number of teams from out of town that would add significant hotel nights. And both the out of town teams and the local teams probably add to the meals eaten at local restaurants.

One of the complaints Bryan had with the bombers is the number of hotel nights never really materialized.

Anyway, hopefully whatever deal is made with the bombers financially offsets the opportunity costs of not being able to use the facility for tournaments. That is assuming the plan is to actually build a facility that enhances hosting more travel ball tournament.

---

The Bombers are only playing home Friday nights in June. Travel ball tournaments are usually Saturday and Sunday. if the fields are turf, no reason they can't do both - Bombers Friday nights and travel ball tournaments on the weekends. Even so, that's only two months out of the year, and travel ball plays ten.

It sounds like College Station won't be letting the Bombers run the facility, allowing it be used much more than just Bomber games.

---

whoop1995 said:

---

Stucco said:

---

I'm just over here trying to figure out why folks are upset.

Is it the fact that we are building a championship field?
Or that we are (potentially) leasing it to the Bombers?
Or that we are leasing it to anyone?

---

I'd give you a synopsis but it will probably get erased. Long story short as said before - question got asked about Bryan bombers being catered to by city of college station.

Councilman speaks up and says cocs is constructing a 15 million complex. Then people ask why- then further details come out it is three fields but one is going to be a championship stadium and not only for bombers. Then congressman says fields won't make that much month themselves but think of the impact on the town.

Councilman says it will be baseball for all. Questions are asked about cost and why 15 million with no vote from citizens. Questions about why 15 million - apparently it only costs 12 to build regular fields - going to be increased to 20 million to add in removable mounds to adapt from baseball to softball. And then possible expansion to 7 on 7 and other sports. Further question were asked and a list of names came out as to who else is going to use this field in an effort to support it like local little league, little league entities not from town, private high schools in Bryan, Texas A&M entities, still baseball for all. Lots of questions on Bryan bombers and other links to what they have done and relationship with Bryan.

People generally agree that maybe little league should expand but cost is crazy in some peoples minds. People disagree on size of championship field. Question was asked about funding for disabled fields - then informative back and forth- got erased by mods- mods telling everyone to respect councilman.

Conclusion
All in all I think people generally can agree with more little league fields but are astonished that the city would jump in bed with Bryan bombers after stories of them come out and use them as an excuse to get more little league parks being side swiped by the news about this subject before the city releases anything and no vote on expenditures twice as big as macys.

Just has a big feeling of the city once again dealing with people that want what they want and talking to the city and then the city going forward thinking they have all the people okays when nothing is put up to a vote and then it comes to light that some citizens aren't informed - because there was no real formal announcement - and the city get mad because those people might wreck their plans. The city becomes astonished once again.

This circle keeps repeating.

---

• Will the fields be built well? I sure hope so.
• Is it priced at market value? It seems awfully high.
• Will it increase QOL in an amount consistent with the cost? (Are there other real opportunities to increase QOL more with these same funds?) Hard to say.
• Is it in the public interest to sign a lease with the Bombers? As long as the city doesn't significantly amend the designs away from the public interest, or give exclusivity, or bail the Bombers out later, and the lease is fair, this seems ok but is risky due to the proximity to economic development.
• Are bond funds being used in a way that is consistent with the bond language and expressly inconsistent with any failed bond language? Can anyone help with this? Are the original bond funds being used for this project at all?

Stucco said:

---

Are bond funds being used in a way that is consistent with the bond language and expressly inconsistent with any failed bond language? Can anyone help with this? Are the original bond funds being used for this project at all?

---

Tailgate88 said:

---

I guess we have to wait until the proposed agreement is made public to make sure, but this seems like it will be a very different arrangement with COCS than it was with COB. As I understand it, the Bombers had exclusive use of that ballpark and I believe they had agreed to make improvements or do maintenance etc. Clearly the COB did not feel the Bombers kept up their end of bargain.

The proposed agreement with COCS will likely be more along the lines of - the Bombers either pay to rent the park, or share some portion of tickets sales and concessions or something - but other than that I think they are just showing up to play baseball, and COCS will be responsible for everything else.

I could be wrong, but there seems to be a lot of hand wringing about what, at the end of the day, is likely just to be a pretty simple rental agreement. And, if the park is there, the city has a responsibility to rent it out as much as they can to offset costs.

---

Bob Yancy said:

---

doubledog said:

---

Bob, there is a saying. "When you buy a used car, you are buying someone else's problem"
I hope this does not become CoCS's problem.

---

Thanks for the heads up. I think this is more like, when you rent out your new boat for 28 half days out of the year, charge a fair price and inspect her real carefully when she returns to the dock. :-)

Respectfully

Bob Yancy '95

---

AggieBaseball06 said:

---

Bob Yancy said:

---

doubledog said:

---

Bob, there is a saying. "When you buy a used car, you are buying someone else's problem"
I hope this does not become CoCS's problem.

---

Thanks for the heads up. I think this is more like, when you rent out your new boat for 28 half days out of the year, charge a fair price and inspect her real carefully when she returns to the dock. :-)

Respectfully

Bob Yancy '95

---

My biggest concern with the Bombers (besides the implications that they aren't the best business partners)-

What happens when other organizations want to rent your boat for 3 full days but the boat is only available for 2.5 days so they go find a different lake? It seems like we aren't maximizing our revenue in that situation.

---

Lone Stranger said:

---

Bob...as long as you recognize you are discussing renting to the same person your neighbor rented their boat to and ended the agreement saying the renter didn't live up to what they said they would do. Like all landlords I hope you get a good deposit on the place.

I do appreciate your participation here.

---