Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Livonianeighbors.com. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. To ensure your privacy, never use personal information in your screen name or email address ("janedoe@hotmail.com" or "Billysmom" for example).

Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Soccer Complex at Cooper; Livonia Observer
Topic Started: Jul 22 2009, 11:10 AM (10,434 Views)
Momof4
Member Avatar
Veteran
If Lessard says he is voting "yes" the whole Liepa gang will.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Momof4
Aug 13 2009, 10:24 PM
If Lessard says he is voting "yes" the whole Liepa gang will.

When does Lessard vote anything other than what Randy wants? Are they conjoined twins or what?
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Extra Olives
Veteran
snoopy
Aug 13 2009, 10:16 PM
Will we be stuck with a still contaminated property that is mismanaged to the point that the so called "partner" bails out and goes defunct and we get stuck with what it currently is, a useless piece of land?
Oh Snoopy, it won't be a totally useless peice of land. It will have a soccer dome on it that we all helped to pay for. Nothing like having a vacant dome to brag about to our friends.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Purple Haze
Veteran
Extra Olives
Aug 14 2009, 11:11 AM
snoopy
Aug 13 2009, 10:16 PM
Will we be stuck with a still contaminated property that is mismanaged to the point that the so called "partner" bails out and goes defunct and we get stuck with what it currently is, a useless piece of land?
Oh Snoopy, it won't be a totally useless peice of land. It will have a soccer dome on it that we all helped to pay for. Nothing like having a vacant dome to brag about to our friends.
and just think, Olives, we could have have our "Back to School" festivities under one dome instead of wasting money having it at all the individual schools - the wonderful LPS Foundation would love that!

if this passes, I will do my best to get all that I know to vote NO for a millage renewal - isn't it interesting they want to stick the millage with the November election? of course, the school board election remains in May...SIGH

why do we live in Livonia again?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Al Beabak
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
Purple Haze
Aug 14 2009, 01:43 PM
Extra Olives
Aug 14 2009, 11:11 AM
snoopy
Aug 13 2009, 10:16 PM
Will we be stuck with a still contaminated property that is mismanaged to the point that the so called "partner" bails out and goes defunct and we get stuck with what it currently is, a useless piece of land?
Oh Snoopy, it won't be a totally useless peice of land. It will have a soccer dome on it that we all helped to pay for. Nothing like having a vacant dome to brag about to our friends.
and just think, Olives, we could have have our "Back to School" festivities under one dome instead of wasting money having it at all the individual schools - the wonderful LPS Foundation would love that!

if this passes, I will do my best to get all that I know to vote NO for a millage renewal - isn't it interesting they want to stick the millage with the November election? of course, the school board election remains in May...SIGH

why do we live in Livonia again?
No, the real question is:

Why do these outsiders who don't live in Livonia running our school district & entire school communities in 2 cities into the ground?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Purple Haze
Veteran
Al Beabak
Aug 14 2009, 05:03 PM
No, the real question is:

Why do these outsiders who don't live in Livonia running our school district & entire school communities in 2 cities into the ground?
because they can - there are unfortunately only a handful who are aware of what is going on - the rest are oblivious or just don't give a rat's ass...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ms. AK
Veteran
Mr. Liepa is not known for having great business sense. What is going on in this district?
Krome on Cars

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ms. AK
Veteran
Fill me in on what is on the November ballot. I am in the dark on this aspect.
Krome on Cars

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ms. AK
Veteran
snoopy
Aug 13 2009, 10:28 PM
Momof4
Aug 13 2009, 10:24 PM
If Lessard says he is voting "yes" the whole Liepa gang will.

When does Lessard vote anything other than what Randy wants? Are they conjoined twins or what?
conjoined--no--some sort of power trip--yes.
Krome on Cars

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Silentwolf
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  * ]
BOE just voted for the soccer complex: 5-2. Yes voters: Lessard, Oke, Scheel, Burton, Freeman. No votes: King, Mang
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mrs.M
Veteran
I agree with Lessard, the budget is not warm and fuzzy and something tells me it's gonna get quite a bit colder and rougher.
I'd agree with you, but then we'd both be WRONG.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
mmmmkay?
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
Mrs.M
Aug 17 2009, 09:53 PM
I agree with Lessard, the budget is not warm and fuzzy and something tells me it's gonna get quite a bit colder and rougher.
...And getting a possible return of 50 - 60 K a year over 30 years is something to feel warm & fuzzy about? Go back to the KFC Colonel, you get a better rate of return on your franchise investment than this loser.



mmmmkay?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Whatever
Member Avatar
Veteran
snoopy
Aug 13 2009, 10:16 PM
Remember this one?

Randy leased part of Dickinson to a broadcast school. He never looked into the individuals background. LPS spent money to prepare for this lessee and ended up that the company was not viable. Legal fees, etc. and then we had to pay attorney's to evict them. He gave them key to the building before they checked them out. It shows a clear example of how LPS does business with outside so called "partners". Do we really need to end up in court and paying huge legal fees again to find out Randy made another mistake like this one? Will we be stuck with a still contaminated property that is mismanaged to the point that the so called "partner" bails out and goes defunct and we get stuck with what it currently is, a useless piece of land?
Explain what the sinking fund can and cannot cover?

A: Sinking funds may be used for purchasing, completing, remodeling or repairing facilities, or parts of or additions to those facilities; acquiring and improving sites, for school buildings, structures, athletic facilities, playgrounds, or other facilities; and technology infrastructure. Technology in this case refers to wiring or materials used for installing technology. It does not include the equipment or software. This fund may be used for repair, but not for maintenance.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Whatever
Member Avatar
Veteran
Sinking fund bill passes House
http://www.miparentsforschools.org/node/111
Thu, 03/26/2009 - 4:28pm — Steven Norton After some floor dramatics last week, the state House succeeded in passing HB 4313, which expands what school districts can purchase with sinking funds. Opponents of the bill, mostly Republicans, argued to no avail that it would constitute an increase in property tax rates that required a super-majority vote in both houses. Other attempts to amend the bill at the last minute also failed. Even so, the legislation passed on a 74-35 vote, with eleven Republicans voting in favor while three Democrats voted against the bill. The bill now heads to the Senate, which allowed similar legislation to die at the end of last session.

Sinking funds are special capital improvement funds that are directly funded by property taxes rather than a bond issue. School officials argue that sinking funds let them make ongoing capital improvements and renovations without having to wait ten or twenty years for a major bond issue. Because they do not involve borrowing money through bonds, advocates say, schools can accomplish more without asking taxpayers to pay for interest costs as well.

Current law allows schools to use sinking funds for a narrow set of tasks, including major building renovation and the purchase of property. School officials have been asking for some years that this definition be expanded to include any expenses which are allowed under bond issues; they were especially interested in adding school buses and technology. Advocates argued that buses and technology had to be replaced on a much shorter cycle than the typical bond issue, forcing them to use precious operating funds for those expenses.

When the bill was introduced by Rep. Mark Meadows (D-East Lansing), its language simply allowed sinking funds to be used for any purpose approved for bond issues. As the bill emerged from committee, its scope was narrowed so that only buses and technology were added to the approved uses of sinking funds. (See our earlier story here.) Sinking fund millage requests that included bus and technology spending would have to be renewed at least every ten years, as opposed to every twenty years for existing sinking fund millages. Sinking fund millage proposals must be offered at the regular May or November election dates, according to the bill in its final form.

There was some drama on the House floor last Thursday, as the bill was advanced to a third reading. The Democratic leadership, hoping to vote on the bill that day, allowed the Republican minority to tack on several amendments to the bill which would then be stripped out with a “substitute” amendment backed by the majority – a common procedural tactic to allow opponents to have their say before they are outvoted. Rep. Tom McMillin (R-Rochester Hills) offered an amendment that would tie the fate of the bill to one he is sponsoring (HB 4490) that lifts the cap on the number of charter schools. Rep. Paul Opsommer (R-DeWitt) proposed a change that would require schools using sinking funds to implement a merit pay system for teachers and administrators. Finally, Rep. John Walsh (R-Livonia) tried again to exempt industrial and commercial personal property from taxes destined to fund buses and technology; a similar change had failed in the Education Committee.

There was a dust-up as Republican members complained that they had wanted to speak to their individual amendments on the record, and not just to the final version as the House Democratic leadership had agreed. Sergeants at arms circled leaders of both parties as they held a spirited discussion in the middle of the House floor before voting was halted. At the House’s next session the following Tuesday, Republican members offered many of the same amendments again, but they all failed. The minority leadership also argued that, under the Michigan Constitution, the bill would require a three-quarters vote to pass because it “increased the statutory limits for ad valorem property taxes” for schools. That approach also failed, and the bill passed in the final vote.

According to the House Fiscal Agency, nearly half of all Michigan school districts levy mills for a sinking fund, although most levy under 2 mills and only twelve districts currently levy the maximum 5 mills.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Whatever
Member Avatar
Veteran
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/schoolaudit_3000_7.pdf

Use of sinking funds---MCL 380.1212 of the revised School Code

Misuse of sinking funds and penalities



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ms. AK
Veteran
Does it sound like financing soccer companies and giving them 15 years of free rent are covered by the sinking fund?


Krome on Cars

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
Here's a copy of the Observer article from yesterday. I don't understand why someone in authority isn't questioning this contract? See the questions from the citizens. Liepa states that they asked their attorney's and auditors whether they could use sinking funds to support this project, but I don't understand how this can be legal. They aren't using this money just for the kids education, it's for Breeze Management to run a business.



Trustees OK soccer complex at Cooper
By Ken Abramczyk • OBSERVER STAFF WRITER • August 20, 2009

Read Comments(2)RecommendPrint this page E-mail this article Share Del.icio.us
Facebook
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Buzz up!Twitter
The Livonia school board approved a cooperative agreement Monday with a private company to lease the site of the old Cooper School for a soccer complex.



The district will use $1 million from the district's sinking fund to improve the property, a former landfill, and $800,000 from a Michigan Department of Environmental Quality grant.

The board approved it, 5-2, with board president Lynda Scheel, Colleen Burton, Robert Freeman, Daniel Lessard and Gregory Oke supporting the action, and trustees Steve King and Patrice Mang opposing it.

The school district would grade the property, cap the landfill, erect a soccer dome provided by the company, plant grass, build a retention pond, install an irrigation system and add a parking lot and lights.

Breeze Sports Management of West Bloomfield would lease about half of the 40-acre site for 35 years, paying the school district about $2 million over that time period. Breeze would pay $55,000 for each of the first three lease years, then increase that total $5,000 periodically to $75,000 annually in lease years 26 through 35.

The company would manage the complex, which would include four outdoor soccer fields, a couple of training fields and a dome for indoor soccer. If the company defaults, the school district gets to keep the dome.

Construction may begin in December or January, Supt. Randy Liepa said.

The school, built in the 1960s, was closed in 1991 because of contamination. The district has since torn it down. A fence surrounds the site, located across from the new Cooper Upper Elementary School at 28550 Ann Arbor Trail. Residents appeared both for and against the proposal.

“Why are you spending $1 million on a soccer complex for a private entity when the state is cutting back on aid?” asked Donald Johnson.

Eileen McDonnell asked if it was legal for the district to use public money to support private enterprise and whether the company had collateral or pledged money to put up front for the project. “It's too much money to spend on a deal that doesn't seem real solid to me,” McDonnell said.
(2 of 2)


Ted McClain thought the board should move ahead with the project as the district has struggled with the property for years. “It sounds like some people don't want to spend a million dollars,” he said. But money already had been spent by the city of Westland and the state, he said.



“It needs to be done whether or not you think it should be done,” McClain said.

Liepa told trustees and the audience that previous developers came up with plans that included a senior center and a larger soccer complex than the one now proposed. Those plans fell through, primarily because of the economy.

Liepa said these plans put the property to good use and it will be leveraged by state funds and private investment. The complex will generate money for the district's general fund at a time when the state is cutting aid, he said.

“What it does for the long haul is it gives us something positive to build over there,” Liepa said.

Liepa said he checked with two legal firms and the district's auditor on the legality of spending the sinking fund on the site. “We would not want to jeopardize the future of the sinking fund,” Liepa said. “We were careful to check with them.”

King proposed just capping the site and thought the action was open to a legal challenge in using the sinking funds normally earmarked for buildings. He cited a House bill that expanded the use of the sinking fund for technology and buses. “To me, we should be spending that money on technology and buses,” King said.

King also wondered what impact the action would have on the success of the sinking fund millage election in November when the district was spending $1 million on the Cooper site.

Liepa repeated that he had checked with two legal firms and auditors on the fund's use. “We aren't building a soccer field for a private company,” Liepa said. “It's going to be a complex for the community. We're not building it for them, we are building it for us.”

On Wednesday, Liepa said the district expected that its students would be able to use the facility for free during the day.

Without the complex, the district would continue to own a landfill, he said. “We will own a landfill or some other kind of development,” Liepa told trustees.

Oke said that it was “wrong” that the district hasn't addressed the problems at the property site. “As a property owner, we have a responsibility to do something with this property,” Oke said.

Lessard said he received an email that asked why the district wait and sell the property. “I'd love to,” Lessard said. “It's been sitting there for at least 15 years. Folks are not lining up. It's unfortunate, but we're stuck with a dump.”

Burton called the project a positive thing for the community. Mang said she opposed the project because she disagreed with the use of the sinking fund, but added that since the board approved it, she will support it.

Ted McClain thought the board should move ahead with the project as the district has struggled with the property for years. “It sounds like some people don't want to spend a million dollars,” he said. But money already had been spent by the city of Westland and the state, he said.



“It needs to be done whether or not you think it should be done,” McClain said.

Liepa told trustees and the audience that previous developers came up with plans that included a senior center and a larger soccer complex than the one now proposed. Those plans fell through, primarily because of the economy.

Liepa said these plans put the property to good use and it will be leveraged by state funds and private investment. The complex will generate money for the district's general fund at a time when the state is cutting aid, he said.

“What it does for the long haul is it gives us something positive to build over there,” Liepa said.

Liepa said he checked with two legal firms and the district's auditor on the legality of spending the sinking fund on the site. “We would not want to jeopardize the future of the sinking fund,” Liepa said. “We were careful to check with them.”

King proposed just capping the site and thought the action was open to a legal challenge in using the sinking funds normally earmarked for buildings. He cited a House bill that expanded the use of the sinking fund for technology and buses. “To me, we should be spending that money on technology and buses,” King said.

King also wondered what impact the action would have on the success of the sinking fund millage election in November when the district was spending $1 million on the Cooper site.

Liepa repeated that he had checked with two legal firms and auditors on the fund's use. “We aren't building a soccer field for a private company,” Liepa said. “It's going to be a complex for the community. We're not building it for them, we are building it for us.”On Wednesday, Liepa said the district expected that its students would be able to use the facility for free during the day.

Without the complex, the district would continue to own a landfill, he said. “We will own a landfill or some other kind of development,” Liepa told trustees.

Oke said that it was “wrong” that the district hasn't addressed the problems at the property site. “As a property owner, we have a responsibility to do something with this property,” Oke said.

Lessard said he received an email that asked why the district wait and sell the property. “I'd love to,” Lessard said. “It's been sitting there for at least 15 years. Folks are not lining up. It's unfortunate, but we're stuck with a dump.”

Burton called the project a positive thing for the community. Mang said she opposed the project because she disagreed with the use of the sinking fund, but added that since the board approved it, she will support it.

http://www.hometownlife.com/article/20090820/NEWS10/908200552/1027/Trustees+OK+soccer+complex+at+Cooper

In Your Voice| Read reactions to this story
Newest first Oldest first
timeless04 wrote:

I forgot, that school is in Westland....what about Hull... tear that down and build a park...what about the other abandoned school.....

What a waste of money.....Don't vote for the bonds in Sept.....
8/20/2009 8:00:24 PM I forgot, that school is in Westland....what about Hull... tear that down and build a park...what about the other abandoned school.....<br /><br />What a waste of money.....Don't vote for the bonds in Sept..... timeless04
Recommend New post Reply to this Post Report Abuse


timeless04 wrote:

Our schools could really use that money to improve the bathrooms in all the schools!!!
Our schools could use that money for tables/chairs/windows/ac...and the list is endless.

I will not vote for any more increases in bonds or anything until we get a new board!!
8/20/2009 7:58:26 PM Our schools could really use that money to improve the bathrooms in all the schools!!!<br />Our schools could use that money for tables/chairs/windows/ac...and the list is endless.<br /><br />I will not vote for any more increases in bonds or anything until we get a new board!! timeless04
Recommend New post Reply to this Post Report Abuse




You must be logged in to leave a comment. Login | Register



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mrs.M
Veteran
“We aren't building a soccer field for a private company,” Liepa said. “It's going to be a complex for the community. We're not building it for them, we are building it for us.”

On Wednesday, Liepa said the district expected that its students would be able to use the facility for free during the day.


We already have a complex for the community, called the Rec Center; it's on the corner of Hubbard and 5 mile. Could the community use this complex at no additional cost?

Which students/school would be using the indoor soccer field in the day time?
During school hours? Bussing students to the dome for a phys ed class? Maybe for use as a planetarium for science classes? :huh:
I'd agree with you, but then we'd both be WRONG.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LPS Reformer
Member Avatar
The schools exist to educate, not employ.
Ms. 'McDonnell's questions at the last BOE meeting were dead on, and Ms. Scheel's were as vapid as usual.

Questions on the Dome.
“Child Abuse” means different things to different people....
----Randy Liepa 8/9/12
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Administrator
Administrator
MDEQ provides more money for Cooper cleanup
BY DARRELL CLEM
STAFF WRITER

(November 2006)


A $1 million state grant, authorized Monday to clean up the contaminated Cooper School property in Westland, could be the final piece of a 15-year puzzle for redeveloping the site, officials said.

The grant will bring to nearly $3.4 million the amount allocated for the project by the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality.

The total includes nearly $2.4 million in grants for the Livonia school district, which shuttered the school in 1991, and a $1 million revolving loan for the city of Westland.

Officials called the latest grant critical for cleaning up the former landfill and making it feasible for developers to build medical office buildings and a senior citizen independent living facility.

"Without this we would not have been able to go ahead with the project," said Jack Kirksey, former Livonia mayor and project consultant for the Livonia district.

Westland Mayor Sandra Cicirelli announced the latest grant on Monday, saying it will boost remediation efforts on the site on Ann Arbor Trail east of Middlebelt.

"This additional funding is the direct result of a lot of hard work on the part of the city, the Livonia Public Schools and the developers of the site over the last couple of years," Cicirelli said.

Officials had met regularly to push for more state funding after the MDEQ ruled that contaminated soil will have to be hauled away -- rather than isolated in one area and capped.

"We have been meeting on a regular basis in order to bring this project to completion, and there was a last-minute need for additional funding that could not be provided by the city, the schools or the developer," Cicirelli said.

"I am extremely happy that the MDEQ stepped in to ensure that all our hard work will not go for naught."

Departing state Sen. Laura Toy, R-Livonia, and her successor, state Rep. Glenn Anderson, D-Westland, also announced the latest grant.

The redevelopment project fell behind an earlier, tentative schedule as officials awaited word on additional funding.

On Tuesday, Kirksey said remediation efforts could begin as early as next year, when students are on summer break at the newer, nearby Cooper Upper Elementary School.

Construction of the first of potentially four medical office buildings could begin by the end of 2007, he said.

Developers plan to build a multi-story senior housing facility as market conditions, currently sluggish, improve.

Officials are more optimistic than ever that the Cooper School site will finally be redeveloped and generate new tax revenues.

The school was demolished two years ago.

dclem@hometownlife.com | (734) 953-2110

http://s14.zetaboards.com/Hull_Neighbors_Net/topic/358998/1/


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mayor drops ball on park problem


There are similarities between the former Cooper School site and Central City Park. Both are in Westland, both are former dump sites and both are contaminated sites.

It's the difference in the response to the problems that concerns us. When the contamination was found at Cooper School, the Livonia Public Schools moved students, shuttered the building and fenced off the 37-acre site. Fifteen years later, the land is just now being remediated for redevelopment.

Central City Park is now closed. Mayor Sandra Cicirelli said it's temporary and precautionary, so more testing can be done and a remediation plan developed. She also has stated, in a newspaper interview, she became aware of the problem earlier this year and would have closed the park had someone told her to do that.

We don't buy that explanation. As mayor of the city, she is responsible for the health and safety of the residents. Even if it was just this year that she found out about the contamination -- which we find highly unlikely since, during her time in office, Wayne County (which owns the land, which the city leases for park space) has filed at least four plans with the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality to clean up the site -- why did she wait until now, just days before the newspaper article was published?

The mayor has shown strong leadership in getting the Cooper School site cleaned up and on the track for redevelopment, but we believe she dropped the ball on Central City Park. It would have been better to be proactive on behalf of the adults and children who frequent the park than wait for someone to tell her to close it. We also believe that she should have made her decision known immediately to the city council and to residents. She is cable-TV savvy and could have used it as a means of getting the word out. As it stands, the signs around the park are a milquetoast announcement in comparison to the contamination problem.

Now that the problem is public, we hope the mayor and council will take the steps necessary to secure the park property and press Wayne County and the MDEQ for a quick resolution. Central City Park is the city's premier recreation site. It needs to be fixed and fixed quickly.

http://s14.zetaboards.com/Hull_Neighbors_Net/topic/358975/1/

http://s14.zetaboards.com/Hull_Neighbors_Net/topic/357604/1/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Livonia Neighbors Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply