Jan 19, 2007 By Christine Haines 4 min read

CALIFORNIA – Football fields and fitness centers were the hot topics at Wednesday’s California Area School Board meeting, even though the school board tabled action on a proposed wellness center. Several residents attended the meeting upset over the recent demolition of the bleachers at Booster Field. Several board members said that while they voted to accept the bid for demolition, they had been under the impression that the order to proceed would not be given immediately.

A group of residents had previously approached the board, volunteering to handle the necessary upgrades to make the bleachers safe, including finding an engineer to design the changes or they would tear them down at no cost to the district.

“The foundation and the steel were structurally sound. I put together a plan for new flooring and to enclose the back with open wire mesh. It’s kind of moot now, since they’ve been torn down, but that was a feasible option. The wire mesh would have let the air pass through,” said Carl DeiCas of Chester Engineering in Pittsburgh.

Board President Tom Russell said the board was told by the state Department of Education that if any work were done to the bleachers, the district would also need to bring the stadium into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), including renovations to the parking area and restrooms.

School board member George Safin said it was his understanding that the bleacher issue could have been addressed as a maintenance issue and would not have forced the ADA renovations.

“Is it feasible for us to keep going with this field?” California resident and former borough council president Artie Harris asked. “We’d still like to go ahead and do the field. We’re talking new lights, artificial turf and refurbishing the concession stand. If you’re going to do something else with the field, you need to let us know.”

“We need that field and we need it to be safe for the public. The district absolutely, definitely needs that field. Part of taking the bleachers down is to move the fence back to enlarge the field for soccer,” said school board member John Bayer.

The board voted Wednesday to have the field, Phillipsburg School and 80 acres along Malden Road appraised, but Bayer said the appraisal had nothing to do with getting rid of Booster Field. Bayer said the appraisals had to do with the proposal to construct a Wellness Center and district offices on the Malden campus that already houses the district’s schools.

The district is pursing a $2 million state grant that requires an equal local match. Bayer said the value of the land would go toward the district’s contribution. There have been several public meetings regarding the proposed wellness center that could potentially include an indoor pool, walking track, aerobic room, fitness and weight equipment and other features. An estimate previously prepared for California Borough came to $7.9 million for the facility. A previous proposal including a football field and wellness center came to nearly $11 million.

The board Wednesday tabled action that would have authorized payments totaling $66,000 to three firms for a master site plan, conceptual design study and geological investigation. Solicitor John Smart said he needed more information about the plan before he could give the board his recommendation, since the plan may involve a partnership with several entities outside the school district such as the California Area Parks and Recreation Association and Mon Valley Hospital.

“There was to be a follow-up meeting between the lawyers to get everything ironed out,” Smart said.

The school board extended the voting meeting for the site plan development until the Feb. 12 committee of the whole meeting at Phillipsburg School.

The board also authorized the payment of $88,776 to Huntington National Bank as part of the National School Fitness settlement. The district had several years ago entered into an agreement with National School Fitness that was to provide fitness equipment at little or no cost to the district, but the program was ended after it came under investigation. The $88,776 is money that had been loaned by the bank for the district’s initial participation fee that was to have been reimbursed over time. It was pointed out that the settlement funds were not taxpayer money.