Bob Yancy said:

---

Buford T. Justice said:

---

I've never attended a Bombers game.
How many people do they usually draw for a game?
After having recently seen the conditions of Travis Park, while attending a flag football game, I can't imagine that thousands of people go to these games.

---

800 to 1500 per game, with an October non baseball event that generates 2,500 attendees.

Respectfully

Bob Yancy '95

---

Bob, IF this is the case then why is Bryan not fighting hard to keep the Bombers? I think we need to know how Bryan officials feel about this move, before CoCS proceeds.

tu ag said:

---

My opposition isn't to baseball fields. I think a multi million $ stadium is the issue. "Amenities" are where public officials step beyond d a public good towards subsidizing things for private businesses and a very small (if vocal and organized) percentage of the population.

Are you going to build a stadium for the special needs kids who bowl weekly?

---

That's a fair opinion. I can't and won't argue with it. Should the preponderance of citizen bosses feel the same, we would be compelled to comply. I would like to point out we did decide to build a very nice park for special needs kids in Fun for All playground and we are improving it, too.

Where I'm at now, is we have an incredible array of options where a Dad can take his kids for pitch and catch or a nature stroll. Open field parks are everywhere. For organized ball, not so much. And for those big draw tournaments culminating in a championship game of baseball, softball, 7 on 7, soccer, etc? Woefully inadequate. The Bombers could move to Katy tomorrow. This isn't about the Bombers. We aren't building anything for the Bombers if that's what we decide. If we build it, we're building it for the community.

Respectfully

Yancy '95

doubledog said:

---

Bob Yancy said:

---

Buford T. Justice said:

---

I've never attended a Bombers game.
How many people do they usually draw for a game?
After having recently seen the conditions of Travis Park, while attending a flag football game, I can't imagine that thousands of people go to these games.

---

800 to 1500 per game, with an October non baseball event that generates 2,500 attendees.

Respectfully

Bob Yancy '95

---

Bob, IF this is the case then why is Bryan not fighting hard to keep the Bombers? I think we need to know how Bryan officials feel about this move, before CoCS proceeds.

---

I think we know exactly how the COB feels about the move. I'm also pretty sure COCS knows what they're getting into with that organization, and that the Bombers will contribute squat to the facility and might not even pay rent.

People keep focusing on the Bombers when it's just a fraction of what the facility will be used for.

Bob Yancy said:

---

If we build it, we're building it for the community.

---

if this were about serving the community or serving the voters, this process would have looked very different.

Why couldn't the local High School fields be built up to par to accommodate Bombers one month of play and a few tourneys when the HS isn't playing? I am not into baseball so I don't know how all of the fields are used. I assume they aren't really used during June nor year round. High Schools would get great facilities and a means to recoup income and there wouldn't be a need to build new ones every few years. Just seems like it would be a better way to spend the funds for maximum usage but maybe I'm thinking too simplistic. Not to mention, local and high school clubs could run the concessions to earn more money.

I've never understood why the Bombers and A&M athletics couldn't work out a deal to play at Olsen for 2-3 months.

Buford T. Justice said:

---

I've never understood why the Bombers and A&M athletics couldn't work out a deal to play at Olsen for 2-3 months.

---

Because A&M Athletics is going to want a good financial partner for that kind of trouble. Based on feedback here, that's not the Bombers.

I would be shocked if the Bombers could come even close to paying enough to be worth the time, trouble, and operating costs for use of Blue Bell.

doubledog said:

---

Bob Yancy said:

---

Buford T. Justice said:

---

I've never attended a Bombers game.
How many people do they usually draw for a game?
After having recently seen the conditions of Travis Park, while attending a flag football game, I can't imagine that thousands of people go to these games.

---

800 to 1500 per game, with an October non baseball event that generates 2,500 attendees.

Respectfully

Bob Yancy '95

---

Bob, IF this is the case then why is Bryan not fighting hard to keep the Bombers? I think we need to know how Bryan officials feel about this move, before CoCS proceeds.

---

It's obvious how COB officials feel.

They are jubilant.

Independence H-D said:

---

doubledog said:

---

Bob Yancy said:

---

Buford T. Justice said:

---

I've never attended a Bombers game.
How many people do they usually draw for a game?
After having recently seen the conditions of Travis Park, while attending a flag football game, I can't imagine that thousands of people go to these games.

---

800 to 1500 per game, with an October non baseball event that generates 2,500 attendees.

Respectfully

Bob Yancy '95

---

Bob, IF this is the case then why is Bryan not fighting hard to keep the Bombers? I think we need to know how Bryan officials feel about this move, before CoCS proceeds.

---

It's obvious how COB officials feel.

They are jubilant.

---

Yes. The relationship had run its course. It was important to me, as one member of council, that there wasn't any perception we were taking anything from the CoB. My understanding is they have alternate plans for Travis. As always, they know I wish them the absolute best.

Respectfully

Yancy '95

Quote:

---

Yes. The relationship had run its course. It was important to me, as one member of council, that there wasn't any perception we were taking anything from the CoB. My understanding is they have alternate plans for Travis. As always, they know I wish them the absolute best

---

Insanity is doing the same thing expecting a different result. If the Bombers were bad tenants at Travis Field, why would we expect a "good" relationship with them in COCS?

If they don't pay or live up to their contractual obligations, will you terminate their contract?

I can't say I have ever seen anything like 800 at one of their games. Maybe my small sample was at an off time or opponent. I'd sure like to know if that is tickets (sold and given away) or actual attendance.

All due respect Yancy but CoCS gave the land, FFA Playground was privately funded. We fundraised for years and are still doing so for Phase 3. Local Rotary clubs played a huge role in ot.

Bob....I willl give you the benefit of the doubt that you haven't done any homework on what started all the problems between COB and the Bombers (owner/organization) not living up to their contract/lease. Your big picture answer of "weren't they there 19 years?" skirts the actual subject many are asking about and at worst looks like a deflection from addressing the COB and Bombers lease issues that caused them to part ways.

You might have better reception if you could give voters a feel for the amount of extra marginal dollars it is going to take above and beyond what was in the plans to build the "champsionship field" the Bombers seem to be asking for. I would ask council to PLEASE do some due diligence on the COB parting ways with the Bombers before committing to bring them in. I'm guessing you do background checks on your renters before signing leases.

Perhaps Mr. Yancy can clarify the timing, but the new fields (including the championship stadium) were announced back in December with very little negative reaction. My thought is that the Bombers leadership saw the plans and thought it sounded like a place they could play their games rather than it being a situation where the city is building a stadium for the Bombers.

Lone Stranger said:

---

Bob....I willl give you the benefit of the doubt that you haven't done any homework on what started all the problems between COB and the Bombers (owner/organization) not living up to their contract/lease. Your big picture answer of "weren't they there 19 years?" skirts the actual subject many are asking about and at worst looks like a deflection from addressing the COB and Bombers lease issues that caused them to part ways.

You might have better reception if you could give voters a feel for the amount of extra marginal dollars it is going to take above and beyond what was in the plans to build the "champsionship field" the Bombers seem to be asking for. I would ask council to PLEASE do some due diligence on the COB parting ways with the Bombers before committing to bring them in. I'm guessing you do background checks on your renters before signing leases.

---

Howdy- I was pretty specific, to the best of my memory, on the approximate added cost to build a championship field. The delta is around $4m, subject to change when we get better estimates from the architect- but again- we are not building the champ field for the Bombers.

And respectfully, I think a 19 year relationship, transcending multiple CoB councils says a lot more than how it ended. All agreements pretty much expire at some point. I'm in touch with lifelong friends at the CoB, regularly. I always will be. I've not heard of any malfeasance by anyone. But I'm not here to defend the Bombers or the CoB.

Any relationship we ultimately codify with the Bombers will be in the best interests of CSTX or I won't vote for it. At the end of the day it's a lease agreement for 27 days out of the year, and to my knowledge most of those are half days or evenings only, and many games are during the week when few others would use the field.

I'll do a PACER search, as I usually do, to see if there's any bankruptcies or ongoing litigation but look, if they violate the terms of any agreement with us we'll part ways.

This whole line of questioning about the integrity or creditworthiness or whatever it is you're intimating makes me distinctly uncomfortable. You're talking about people here. There's real personalities behind that organization that you guys are assailing the character of, and you're doing so while cloaked in anonymity. I don't think that's right.

Captn_Ag05 said:

---

Perhaps Mr. Yancy can clarify the timing, but the new fields (including the championship stadium) were announced back in December with very little negative reaction. My thought is that the Bombers leadership saw the plans and thought it sounded like a place they could play their games rather than it being a situation where the city is building a stadium for the Bombers.

---

That's my general recollection. And I've learned on this thread that discussion of a champ field dates back to 2019. This is what we approved in December- 6 months ago… (see pic)

tu ag said:

---

https://www.kbtx.com/2024/07/16/city-bryan-reviews-entertainment-agreements-special-session/

https://www.bryantx.gov/statement-about-the-city-of-bryan-and-infinity-sports-entertainment-exclusive-facility-use-agreement/

---

I think the key differentiator here is in the word "exclusive."

Respectfully

Yancy '95

TAMU1990 said:

---

Bob Yancy said:

---

Captn_Ag05 said:

---

Perhaps Mr. Yancy can clarify the timing, but the new fields (including the championship stadium) were announced back in December with very little negative reaction. My thought is that the Bombers leadership saw the plans and thought it sounded like a place they could play their games rather than it being a situation where the city is building a stadium for the Bombers.

---

That's my general recollection. And I've learned on this thread that discussion of a champ field dates back to 2019. This is what we approved in December- 6 months ago… (see pic)

---

365 to center is too small. Needs to be 385 at a minimum, unless you're going to build a very tall wall.

---

Thanks for that feedback. I'll convey it to the committee. Can't wait to just have some baseball. I'm all drama'd out.

Yancy '95

TAMU1990 said:

---

Bob Yancy said:

---

Captn_Ag05 said:

---

Perhaps Mr. Yancy can clarify the timing, but the new fields (including the championship stadium) were announced back in December with very little negative reaction. My thought is that the Bombers leadership saw the plans and thought it sounded like a place they could play their games rather than it being a situation where the city is building a stadium for the Bombers.

---

That's my general recollection. And I've learned on this thread that discussion of a champ field dates back to 2019. This is what we approved in December- 6 months ago… (see pic)

---

365 to center is too small. Needs to be 385 at a minimum, unless you're going to build a very tall wall.

---

A real championship field would be 400 feet to center field.

365 feet is a band box.

Bob Yancy said:

---

I'm all drama'd out.

---

Throughout this process you have shown a careless disregard for the wishes and wellbeing of the citizens. You have gotten pushback repeatedly since you started hinting at overriding the bond vote. How did you think we would react to the news that the primary beneficiary of all this is going to be the Bombers?

You've seen over and over again that when the city makes decisions to redirect taxpayer funds to wasteful pet projects, they get upset.

You and the rest of council haven't even pretended to care what the benefits of this thing are until it was announced the Bombers were getting first dibs on the facilities they are designing. Your priorities are showing. Obviously us plebs are going to be miffed to learn you are wasting our tax dollars to benefit the Bombers first and foremost.

Tone. Deaf.

If NOTHING else....

Someone in public information for the city should have foreseen the potential for the public to not really want to stomach this after the debacles of Macy's, the previous baseball fields, Northgate highrise, mid town and the multitudes of decisions dating all the way back to the purchase of Chimney Hill.

In the simplest terms, from a public information perspective....

The appearance is that the City continues to double down on stupid during a time when fiscal conservatism is on the rise.

At the very least, CoCS has a serious perception issue.

Brian Alg said:

---

Bob Yancy said:

---

I'm all drama'd out.

---

Throughout this process you have shown a careless disregard for the wishes and wellbeing of the citizens. You have gotten pushback repeatedly since you started hinting at overriding the bond vote. How did you think we would react to the news that the primary beneficiary of all this is going to be the Bombers?

You've seen over and over again that when the city makes decisions to redirect taxpayer funds to wasteful pet projects, they get upset.

You and the rest of council haven't even pretended to care what the benefits of this thing are until it was announced the Bombers were getting first dibs on the facilities they are designing. Your priorities are showing. Obviously us plebs are going to be miffed to learn you are wasting our tax dollars to benefit the Bombers first and foremost.

---

I can say repeatedly that the Bombers are just another tenant, that they'll pay to lease the facility, that we're not building anything "for" the Bombers- and you can keep asserting the opposite and using the word "we" as if the majority are opposed to 3 new baseball fields. We both have that right. And If I didn't care Brian I wouldn't be debating you and others on this platform.

Can we resume this discussion later, please? I lowered my flag to half staff at sunrise today. I suggest we all relax and enjoy this Memorial Day for those who gave us the freedom to do so.

Respectfully yours, sir

Bob Yancy '95

I'm sure all the anti-Bomber posters have looked at the Bombers schedule this year. They are not playing a home game at Travis on ANY weekend in June. They are playing home games EVERY weekend in July.

A large difference between this deal and the current CoB agreement is the EXCLUSIVE right the Bombers had at Travis Field.

If that schedule were to stay the same, CoCS would be able to host tournaments on any Saturday - Sunday in June, while still having the stadium being leased during the week. The Bombers only play in June and July. Which means only 4 weekends a year would be used by the Bombers.

Assuming the lease payments are made, that's not a bad deal for the CoCS.

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?