limiting where the cricket games can be played? Watching the city council meeting the teams had four places and now are limited to
Grout Park.
I don't blame the Guyanese citizens being upset. And what was that about the city selling a portion of Central Park to Union College, did I hear that right?

I hope you heard wrong, but the city is famous for giving away our property to some other entity that will "keep it nice", even though it isn't theirs to give. They bend over backwards for Union, and then they knock Roger Hull for acting like he owns the place. Go figure.
OMG, quit wasting our money downtown and maintain what little parkland we have left.
Why is that group they gave the rose garden to allowed to keep a trash dump and mulch pile permanently on site? Do they think it's invisible? Not enough parks employees to maintain it? We have fewer parks employees, but the city has given away much of our parkland so there isn't as much to maintain, is there?

They used to play in Central Park in that field next to the basketball courts.

At the May 29th council meeting a group of Guyanese got up to talk about how they had the four fields and are now being told they can  only use Grout Park. One young man told how it took while to build a pitch but it only took the  city two  hours to destroy it.

As for Central Park must be the area Henry is talking about , the main speaker said that the city sold a section to Union College.

And that there are many teams and Grout Park is not big enough to accommodate and that they have the teams to keep kids off the
streets and to keep fit.

And that they pay taxes and deserve better treatment from the city. And that the city told them they could go outside the city to play

And they are right.

Union pays no taxes.

Kind of proves that the city politicians really don't care at all about the residents or their problems.

Quoted from Shadow

Kind of proves that the city politicians really don't care at all about the residents or their problems.

Well of course, aren't we certain that the board cheerleader for the dems, the "dem voice," certainly he can enlighten us and explain how the city is showing it cares about the residents.

Explain how the city cares about the residents with this issue over a large population of TAXPAYING residents don't have an adequate place to play cricket, on top of explaining how the city cares about it's TAXPAYING residents also city causing very very costly damage to a homeonwer's sidewalk and car by refusing to address a tree after several YEARS, and how the  city supposedly cares about the TAXPAYING residents when the city makes them pay for expensive renos for millionaires and pay the taxes of those millionaires and then the city financially penalizes the TAXPAYING residents for every little minor thing it can find wrong in a house including the utterly STUPID size of house numbers!

Since those dem council people won't respond to people, not come on these boards, let's see if their big cheerleader for the dems can tell us how the city cares about the TAXPAYING residents in the NEIGHBORHOODS, and perhaps cite some examples with some evidence to prove those examples.          We WON'T expect an answer.  

That area by the basketball courts, yeah, that was handed over to Union a while back. Marv Cermak questioned it in one of his columns, but everybody else seems to believe giveaways of public property is "good for" Schenectady.
This could be part of the reason Roger Hull lost against McCheese in the election, maybe a few thinking people could not bring themselves to vote for Union College over the residents, but we were going to get that either way. McCheese was all in favor of this Union College pandering while it was taking place, and he is also all in for the Proctor's monstrosity. It's interesting, you get competing interests fighting over control of public property that actuallybelongs to - the public!
That waste of money pavilion in the park sits draped in ugly plastic, inside an ugly chain link fence to make sure the public doesn't get in there. I'm toldsome private group pays to use it for winter meetings, hence the shower curtain looking cover. There are also messy looking trash cans visible in the "back" which isn't really a back side because it's a pavilion in the midst of a public playground. If you go to Central Park for the day and there's a sudden shower, I guess you can go into the bathrooms or the casino because you can't wait it out under that roof next to the playground, that's off limits.
Wait, any group that pays for or maintains our parkland, we are supposed to be happy that they have it instead of us. Except we didn't get a corresponding reduction in our taxes every time we lose our property.

The city did not SELL any part of Central Park to Union.  In order for the city to sell any parkland at Central Park it would have to establish new parkland of equivalent size someplace else.  The city has long term agreements with Union College for the use of fields at Central Park.   There is nothing unusual or improper about that.  Union College and other colleges (Siena a number of years ago) and leagues have had similar arrangements.

There is something wrong about fencing off public parkland for exclusive use by a private entity, if one lives here and pays for the park. I don't care if the private entity pays something for it, if they want private use of property they should buy some. I also did not state that Union bought it.
The Johnson administration was constantly going to court for alienation of parkland and not making plans for replacement. These agreements for use are just a way of skirting the laws. I think I clearly stated my objections to this. Anyhow, people who don't live in Schenectady really don't have any say about our parks, do they?

Quoted from rpforpres

limiting where the cricket games can be played? Watching the city council meeting the teams had four places and now are limited to
Grout Park.
I don't blame the Guyanese citizens being upset. And what was that about the city selling a portion of Central Park to Union College, did I hear that right?

Someone asked if the city was selling part of Central Park.   And the last time that I checked, anybody could respond to or NOT respond to whatever they wanted to on this site -- regardless of where they lived.

Oh, anybody can respond to any thread, I'm all in favor of that. I think the RESIDENTS who can't use a field they used to have access to would take exception to the statement that there is nothing improper about fencing off a piece of the park for private use. That's for the owners of the property to decide, whether they think it is proper or not. The city should be taking care of the needs of the citizens first, no? I think I stated my position clearly, other citizens might have a different opinion than mine which they are free to express as well. It's their park too.

Quoted from Shadow

Kind of proves that the city politicians really don't care at all about the residents or their problems.

It's not something is awry-everything is awry. Riggi is the only one worth a damn. Horrible racist remarks from the DEM camp. Cricket should return to Central Park as should minor league baseball.

Personally, I believe Central Park in the city and the various parks Rotterdam should be open for ALL residents (CP for city residents; town parks for town residents).  It is because I believe that and because I believed that it was possible for residents to work WITH town leaders and employees to improve the park - that ultimately the Parks & Recreation Commission was "smothered with a pillow."  We had actually proven that residents were willing to donate time and money to clean and fix up the parks -- we were working with a couple private foundations to do even more to fix up the parks -- unfortunately, the politicians can't take credit when residents VOLUNTARILY give of their time and money to fix problems in the community.    Sadly, the great American spirit of community -- neighbors joining with neighbors to make a difference -- has been told to "take a hike."

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

Personally, I believe Central Park in the city and the various parks Rotterdam should be open for ALL residents (CP for city residents; town parks for town residents).  It is because I believe that and because I believed that it was possible for residents to work WITH town leaders and employees to improve the park - that ultimately the Parks & Recreation Commission was "smothered with a pillow."  We had actually proven that residents were willing to donate time and money to clean and fix up the parks -- we were working with a couple private foundations to do even more to fix up the parks -- unfortunately, the politicians can't take credit when residents VOLUNTARILY give of their time and money to fix problems in the community.    Sadly, the great American spirit of community -- neighbors joining with neighbors to make a difference -- has been told to "take a hike."

DV, you need to get a brain.   It's nice if residents have time to volunteer and give money.   But they are taxed to the max and have little time because many are working two jobs in order to pay the high taxes FORCED UPON THE RESIDENTS by the dems that YOU shake the pom poms for.   And often working either two jobs or extra hours to pay for replacing sidewalks every few years when YOUR BUDDIES refuse to take down trees.  And any time they have available to them MUST be spent trying to make sure the lawn is not over a certain height or the code police will be coming by, etc.

People in the city do NOT have time nor money.   People would love to join with their neighbors, but neither they nor their neighbors can sit home and live off two mommies.  People have bills to pay, people have houses to tend to, people have their spouses and children to support.