The public comments segment of the meeting featured two attendees, Tony Cunningham and Maria Kapiki, advocating for the removal of restrictions on the $800,000 Community Preservation Act (CPA) allocation dedicated to the high school track and field project. Both expressed a preference for option 1D, which was one of the three options presented during the meeting.

Following the public comments, an in-depth presentation of the track and field project was given, detailing the three options now under consideration. These options moved away from artificial turf due to community environmental concerns and ranged in estimated budgets from $1.7 million to $4.23 million. Notably, all three options included an eight-lane track and enhancements such as improved drainage and lighting. The estimated project schedule anticipates regulatory permitting from July to October.

During the discussion, committee members delved into specific details of each option, inquiring about the rationale behind upgrading light towers to LED technology, which promises cost-effectiveness and efficiency. Members also debated the merits of the field’s quality and orientation. One of the options presented proposed a reorientation of the track to a North-South axis, which had previously been recommended due to gameplay considerations, such as the sun’s position. Additionally, the flexibility and long-term planning of the athletic complex were topics of concern, referencing the West and Samson plan for the site’s development.

The debate on the financial feasibility of the options brought to light concerns over potential budget shortfalls. Members discussed the possibility of removing restrictions on available funds to enable the desired renovations. Community input was also a topic of mention, with some members noting a sense of fatigue around the longstanding project.

A key point of contention was the discussion about the contingencies built into the project’s budget. Questions were raised about the frequency of using contingencies and the impact of removing restrictions on the project’s artificial turf and field orientation. The issue of the project’s benefit to the community at large was another focal point, with views differing on the primary focus of the project and the importance of public school athletics.

The meeting reached a critical junition when a motion was made to remove the restriction on artificial turf, which passed following a roll call vote. This was followed by a motion to remove the restriction on the north-south orientation of the track, with an amendment strongly recommending the project maintain this orientation. After friendly acceptance of the amendment, further discussion underscored the committee’s support for the north-south orientation.

The discussion then shifted to the Amherst School Committee’s request for additional funding to reorient the track. The school committee chairwoman emphasized the need for flexibility in funding and the intent to proceed with reorienting the track if additional funds were secured. The historical context of the discussions and the desire to achieve the original vision of the master plan were also highlighted.