Barrington leaders appear embarrassingly tone deaf as they hammer through a new set of fees for everyone playing outdoor recreational sports in town. Consider the evidence …
The town …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
Please log in to continue |
Register to post eventsIf you'd like to post an event to our calendar, you can create a free account by clicking here. Note that free accounts do not have access to our subscriber-only content. |
Are you a day pass subscriber who needs to log in? Click here to continue.
Barrington leaders appear embarrassingly tone deaf as they hammer through a new set of fees for everyone playing outdoor recreational sports in town. Consider the evidence …
Those are the events thus far, leading up to a public hearing before the Barrington Town Council that would likely be in January.
If councilors give this real consideration or even entertain the idea, they should consider the climate in which they make the decision.
Parents today are battling an epidemic with their technology-addicted children. Without a doubt, parents deserve some of the blame for enabling access and not properly monitoring smart phone and other device usage, but they are nonetheless facing a generational crisis. Young people are increasingly sedentary and isolated, with health problems skyrocketing at all levels — suicides, unhealthy relationships, bullying, mental health problems, obesity, drug use … Some of these problems are endemic in teens, but not in the ways or levels being seen today.
Instead of creating barriers to recreational sports — and, yes, an additional $120 per year can be a barrier for a family of three — the town should be working to lower barriers and expand programs.
These sports leagues are swarming with volunteers who devote time and talent to the youth in Barrington. Instead of working with them, to develop programs, ideas, activities and partnerships, the town is maneuvering to see how much money it can squeeze out of them.
If this is the direction for “lowering taxes” and attracting new revenue, then why stop at field fees. Charge usage fees for the old folks visiting the senior center and library fees for patrons who use that magnificent facility. Place donation bins next to the playgrounds and put turnstiles at the entrances to walking trails.
They sound like absurd ideas, but all are town facilities that require maintenance and investment, and all are utilized by just a portion of the town’s population — similar to the families enrolling their kids in recreational sports.
If the town had great sports facilities, perhaps new field fees could be justified. It does not.
If the town were planning to develop new facilities, perhaps new field fees could be justified. It is not.
If the town treated league volunteers like partners and worked together to create more opportunities, perhaps new field fees could be justified. It has not.
So far the town has shoved through a poorly developed plan to extract more money from this town’s families, without a promise of anything in return. So far, the town appears utterly tone deaf.