Oldsmar should step up to plate for Little League

By JACK REED

© St. Petersburg Times, published March 29, 2000

I was never a good baseball player, so Little League was not my happiest experience. But while I wasn't a baseball star, I still recognize the importance of Little League.

Truth is, it is difficult to make an argument against organized youth sports as long as the children are allowed to have fun while learning to compete. My experience taught me adults take the fun out of games, not children.

Which brings us to Oldsmar.

Oldsmar Little League is so popular it is running out of space. The league has more than 700 players and 54 teams on just five fields at Canal Park. That means games are going seven days a week (late into the night on weekdays), and the fields are seldom available for practice.

"Unfortunately, we have a lot of 10- and 11-year-olds . . . not leaving the ballpark until 10:15 p.m. and they have school the next day," said Bill Schneider, the league president.

The league is doing its part to build more fields. An ambitious, three-year fundraising program has earned $130,000 so far. But ball fields are expensive -- nearly $170,000 each -- and league officials figure they need four more at a total cost of about $670,000.

Here is why the league hoped it might reach its lofty goal: The city of Oldsmar applied for a $200,000 state grant for the fields. And the council said it would contribute, too.

Or did it?

Little League officials thought the city had promised money.

Former Mayor Jerry Beverland told me the city had promised the money.

City Council member Ed Richards said the city promised the money.

And City Manager Bruce Haddock put $500,000 in next year's proposed budget for Canal Park, at least some of it for baseball fields.

So why isn't this a congratulatory column on the city and Little League working together to achieve a worthy goal?

Because current Mayor Jeff Sandler and council member Ed Manny said the city made no such promise, and they want to spend the money elsewhere.

"I wouldn't be in favor of putting more money in Canal Park until we get some money for our other parks," Manny told Times staff writer Ed Quioco.

Did the city make a promise? "Not as far as I'm aware," Sandler said.

All agree the council did not vote on the matter, and there is no written record of the council's intentions.

But Beverland remembers it this way: League members came before the council and talked about the need to raise money for more fields. "We told them to go for it," he said on Tuesday. "It was great. I think it was a consensus that we would match what they raised."

Now, Beverland is angry at the council for its about-face. "It's for the kids!" he said, raising his voice.

Maybe city officials have a legitimate difference of opinion over whose memory is correct. But there is also a more troubling explanation, one that has the whiff of politics.

Sandler told me Tuesday that the Little League is not very popular in Oldsmar.

And why is that?

Some 30 percent to 50 percent of the players come from outside the city limits, and residents are tired of paying for their facilities, he said. But Sandler admitted that no one knows for sure how many Little Leaguers live outside the city.

"It would be easier if the Little League would do a better job of public relations," Sandler said. "They need to do more to show they appreciate what the taxpayers have done for them."

Could he give me an example?

The league puts advertisements on its outfield fence, he said. "Why have they never put one up that says "Thank you, Oldsmar?' "

Now we are getting somewhere.

The easiest way to deal with many demands for city resources is to pit one group against another for limited funds. That way the groups are mad at each other rather than at the council members

A responsible council would assess the real needs for parks and recreation and then allocate the money to meet the needs. It's not like the city can't afford it. Oldsmar is the beneficiary of robust economic growth and it hasn't raised taxes in years.

Does the Little League benefit some non-residents? Of course, but what's wrong with that? Won't Oldsmar's emphasis on quality recreation for young people benefit residents, as well, and give the city a positive image? Isn't it good for Oldsmar to be the kind of place where people want to visit its parks, go shopping or even relocate?

Sandler did plant the seed of compromise, however, and it could go like this:

Enough honorable people thought that a past City Council made a promise to the Little League. Even if they don't agree, Sandler and the others should be statesman-like and contribute city money whether the state grant comes through or not. After all, the money is already in the proposed budget.

Also, the council should go forward with other park and recreation improvements that residents expect. It is a time of unprecedented growth in Oldsmar and council members may have to spend more, maybe even raise taxes, to fulfill their duties.

After all, much of the spending is for the kids, as Beverland pointed out.

And what can the Little League do? It can continue to run a popular league, let the kids have some fun and keep up its aggressive fundraising.

And one more thing. It can erect an outfield sign that states: "Thank you, Oldsmar!"

© St. Petersburg Times. All rights reserved.