The Board of Education voted 4-1 on Monday, July 13, to accept the transfer agreement following discussion between board members and administrators. Board member Stephen Lucas cast the “no” vote.
The stadium was built in 1949 north of the Great Miami River as part of a voter-approved bond issue and agreement with leaders of Hobart Brothers Co. that also built Hobart Arena and Miami Shores Golf Course. It has been in the city’s hands since.
The city leased the stadium to the schools, which handled day-to-day operations and upkeep.
The city handled major capital costs unless there was private fund-raising, which occurred in the 1990s, for major renovations. Additional renovations this decade were financed by the city. It owes $2.4 million on project bonds with payments scheduled until 2022.
Details of the transfer proposal were outlined June 24 to council’s parks and recreation committee.
At Monday’s board discussion, Lucas said the schools and city had discussed the stadium transfer for months, but he had not heard an estimate of up to $1.2 million in possible needed capital expenditures until reading reports of the June 24 council discussion. Lucas asked where that number came from, what it included, and if improvements in that price range really are needed.
Don Pence, schools treasurer, said potential costs were discussed a couple of years ago in early talks about a possible stadium transfer. The estimate included sandblasting, replacing seating and possibly building a new press box, among other projects.
Pence and Superintendent Tom Dunn said following the June 24 meeting, and again at Monday’s meeting, that the work outlined — described by one participant as the “Cadillac” approach — is not necessary and can be done later for less than originally estimated. No major capital projects are on the drawing board at this point, they said.
“There is a wide range of things that can be done there ... Just like at your home,” Dunn said.
Board member Doug Trostle said with the district owning the stadium, they can better plan for improvements, and their funding.
“We have the decision making, and the financial responsibility,” board President Joyce Reives said.
Lucas said he voted no because, even if the cost of improvements is less, he thinks the district needs a figure and a plan for payment. “ I feel comfortable that we will be able to manage the future improvement cost of the stadium, however, I think there is a disconnect between what the city estimates and what we estimate,” he said following Monday’s meeting.
Under the transfer agreement, the school district will pay the city $15,000 and abide by restrictions, such as not renaming the stadium without the city’s consent and controls over the types of signs that could be placed on the property. The city will continue to use the stadium for certain special events.
Patrick Titterington, city service and safety director, said review of the lease, which expired last July, came to the forefront in part because of the city’s “financial concerns and existing debt service on the stadium.” Mention of the other possible capital needs to come, such as the seating, also played a part, he said.
Dunn said he believes the transfer protects both the city and the schools and should be seamless for the taxpayers.
“This is not a situation where the city is trying to unload something that is falling apart,” he said. “This allows us to operate the facility, do the things that we need to do.”
Contact this reporter at (937) 225-2292 or nbowman@DaytonDailyNews.com.
About the Author