By Carleen Wild
Moody County Enterprise
Neighbors living near a proposed Colman-Egan athletic complex continue to urge school officials to reconsider its location, saying the current plan raises concerns about space, safety and long-term impact.
The discussion resurfaced at the school board’s most recent meeting, where members approved sending an annexation petition to the City of Colman for the proposed site. The land, currently zoned for agriculture, would need to be annexed before development could move forward.
A number of nearby residents maintain the location — east of the school and behind existing homes — is not the right fit.
Mary Sweeney Gengler told board members recent experiences at other schools’ track meets reinforced those concerns, pointing to parking issues where people parked wherever was easiest rather than in designated areas, as well as the amount of space needed for teams to gather with tents while waiting for events — space she does not believe exists at the proposed site.
“There are other options that would take care of both these scenarios and also have the ability to be expanded as our school grows,” she said.
Gengler also pointed to the Garretson School District as an example of a community that located its athletic facilities outside of residential areas. The Colman-Egan School District does have other options available, including land to the north near an existing baseball and softball complex, but officials maintain the site east of the school best fits the community’s and students’ needs.
“We are pleading with you to stop this nightmare, by building an athletic complex in a location that makes sense not only now, but in the years to come,” said Gengler.
Lora Zwart raised additional concerns about project transparency and costs, specifically related to required pre-construction studies, including a wetland delineation report, questioning whether work already completed by the district might financially be duplicated by the city as the annexation process moves forward.
“I’m just wondering a few things; who is going to complete the study, who is paying for it (obviously the taxpayers) and how much does it cost, do we have any idea who will do this, how much it will cost, and what are the deliverables of this study? I also asked previously for the contract with Puetz (Design & Build), we were told it would be available once it was signed, but we have yet to see that as well.”
In other business, the board approved joining a nutrition services buying group to help manage rising costs for school meals while meeting federal meal requirements.
Also, no candidates filed to challenge incumbents Jen Keyes and Dan Bowen. Unopposed, both will serve another three-year term.
Leave a Reply