Working together sure seems like it’s out of the question for the Turf Association and Cochrane Lions Football when it comes to the creation of a turf field...at least for now it does.
Listening to each organization make presentations to council Jan. 27, and then have Lions Football return Feb. 10 with an update on the progress it had made on the engineering side of the field, one could easily come to the conclusion that these two groups do not like one another — not even a bit.
Councillor Jeff Toews questioned Lions Football on this very matter Feb. 10, asking how the two groups would work together to fully utilize a turf field after what he referred to as a ‘kerfuffle’ outside council chambers two weeks ago.
In a nutshell, the Turf Association was granted $600,000 from the town a year ago, when the group was made up of Cochrane Rangers Adult Soccer, Minor Soccer, the Bow Valley Rugby Club and Cochrane Lions Football. Unable to come to an agreement on how to develop an outdoor turf field, Lions Football split from the group, and, essentially, approached council within a matter of weeks to have the funding taken from the Turf Association and given to them.
So, it’s understandable why there seems to be so much animosity between the two groups.
No one could argue against the passion the Turf Association and Lions Football have for each of the respective ideas.
Lions Football wants to build an artificial turf field on land next to Bow Valley High School, while the Turf Association is looking to construct a domed turf field on a yet-to-be determined site.
Neither side minces any words when it comes to how they feel about their counterpart.
At one point during Feb. 10’s council meeting, Cam Cote from Lions Football, when posed with a scenario from council on possibly sharing the $600,000 with the Turf Association to make the situation more fair, said if council decided to go that way, it would be fine with him, but that Lions Football could live with only getting $500,000, leaving $100,000 for the Turf Association.
The Turf Association has also suggested that many of the costing figures and information provided by the engineering company working with Lions Football is inaccurate, saying that the cost estimates for the domed field were severely inflated.
Lions Football also put council members in a rather difficult position.
The group is on deck to receive the old turf from McMahon Stadium, which is replacing its turf after eight years of use, for free.
Problem is, Lions Football said they had to give McMahon Stadium an answer on whether they would take the turf donation this week, meaning councillors had to make a decision if they would grant the funding request or not, as a ‘no’ answer meant Lions Football would have to decline the turf to avoid the approximate $50,000 disposal fee.
Another problem that arises from this is that council was pressured into making a decision before it was able to hear the updated plans from the Turf Association, which is expected to appear before council soon.
In the end, councillors voted to give $500,000 to Lions Football to move forward on its project, leaving around $100,000 in the pot for the Turf Association.
Is this fair? Should council have made a decision before even hearing the other side of the story?
Both project sound like excellent opportunities, but unless there’s an alternative plan for funding the Turf Association, perhaps council should not have succumb to the pressure of making a decision so quickly before the ‘other guys’ have their say.
