Naperville Park District Misses Boat on Tennis

[Avenging Eagle]

After seeing all of the mistakes made in the planning and design of the future rec center, I have come to the conclusion that the NPD itself is 100% responsible for the problem.

After reading the other thread, we now know that:

- Building a tennis center would cost less than building a pool facility.

- The maintenance and operating costs of a tennis center would be much lower than running a pool facility.

- The income potential of a tennis center would be much greater than that of a pool facility.

- Finally, The liability insurance costs for a tennis center would be much lower than one for a pool facility.

According to their "master plan", written by an external consultant based upon flawed input, they ACTUALLY WANT 2 of these water logged beast facilities instead of 1. They use flawed reasoning that seems like they are trying to balance out the number of gallons found at Centennial beach to be housed in 2 other facilities equally distributed across the area so that they can sleep at night without the horrible guilt of causing "wave inequity".

Why not build one of each?

Its time for the Naperville Park district to wake up and adjust to modern times. Public interest in youth and adult tennis is rising at record levels, and ,at bare minimum, has the right to be listed on the survey sheet. Guess who paid for these consultants? That's right, you did......How does it feel to be ripped off again?

I am fed up with these bureaucratic departments that plod forward with projects with blinders on, clinging to expressions like "it deviates from the master plan" and "we will consider your feedback at a later date", but all the time knowing that they just want to do the bare minimum to complete their job and then go home.

It is painfully clear that in the case of the Naperville Park District, there is an obvious gap in the so-called "master-plan" in that they left out tennis from all consideration.

When we were discussing schools and facilities, many of you looked at other communities to see if we were going down the right path, but when it comes to this issue about the park district facility, you seem to be relatively silent.

Well here are some links to a couple neighboring communities Park Distict Sites. Please note their strong focus on tennis programs.


Schaumburg:
www.parkfun.com/dir/fit/stp/stp-WT.html#

Lockport (who received a grant from the USTA to upgrade their facility)
www.lockportpark.org/fitnessforum.html

Hanover Park:
www.hanoverparkillinois.org/Community/Recreation.htm#Park%20District

I'm sure many of you can come up with other examples.

Now, take a look at the Naperville Park District site. Notice anything missing? Tennis is not found anywhere, except for in the summer classes, in which you have to supply your own racquet (and court I guess).

I have read through their so-called "master plan" once again, and each time, I find something new that makes me more sick. They actually included a sentence about a "potential need for a mountain bike trail". They are in need of a serious wake up call. Last time I checked, our terrain around here has all the elevation of a pancake.

While flopping around in one of their many pools, it looks like the NPD has missed the boat on tennis.

[bob]

You actually think a bunch of tennis courts are going to get more use than a zero recreational pool?

Tennis is a dieing sport.

[Avenging Eagle]

It will only die if you have your way, but thanks for the setup.

Here is an article written by a School Board Member, who also happens to be a teaching tennis pro.

It seems that many members of the community, including yourself, fail to see the benefits of tennis for our kids and community.

Sight Lines: Bursting Through The Glass Ceiling
By Dale G. Caldwell
07/15/2003

Recreational tennis in the United States has hit the proverbial "glass ceiling." Although the sport’s leaders can look through this imaginary glass ceiling to see a future where tennis is the top recreational sport in the country, they have not figured out how to break through and achieve their lofty goal.

As a public school board member and USPTA teaching professional, I know tennis is both a great sport and an effective educational tool. For tennis to become the most popular recreational sport in the country, leadership should develop a strategy to make it an integral part of the academic curriculum for the 50 million public school students in the United States. Given the growth of urban populations and the need to reach this diverse population through innovative educational programs, the benefits tennis offers are an obvious opportunity not to be missed.

The United States is in the midst of an educational crisis in urban areas. The problem is so severe in some urban communities that 50 percent of the students drop out of school. Too many of these "at risk" youth are emotionally hardened, believing they will be perceived as weak and vulnerable if they let other people know how they really feel; how their poor physical shape really is due to a combination of bad diet, little exercise and poor healthcare; and how they struggle with reading, writing and analysis, which will leave them in no position to obtain a college education or find a job that will pull them out of poverty.

These youth either drop out of school or bring their problems with them to a teacher lacking the tools to solve them. As an "at risk" student of legendary Boston urban tennis instructor Jimmy Smith in the ’60s, I learned firsthand that tennis is one of the most effective ways to enhance physical, intellectual and emotional well being. The quickness, hand-eye coordination and endurance gained from playing tennis helped me become physically healthy. The improved concentration skills and mental acuity that comes from playing tennis helped me grow intellectually. The emotional highs and lows of tennis helped me learn to identify and manage my emotions, while also helping me motivate myself and others.

In order to effectively address the needs of urban students, programs that enhance the emotional, physical and intellectual well being of "at risk" youth must be developed. The USTA’s First Serve program is designed to provide tennis training and academic tutoring for young people and is a great start. However, it is an untested program that, even if it is successful, will not be enough — nor is it designed — to meet the needs of America’s "at risk" youth. Many more tennis education programs that enhance the emotional, rational and physical health of "at risk" youth need to be developed before tennis can grow as a recreational sport.

I learned how tennis can effectively be incorporated into public school curriculums in 2000 when Larry Dillon (a PTR professional and executive director of the community-based tennis organization Sports For Life! Inc.) and I created the Tennis, Technology and Theatre© (T3) program. The T3 program, over the last three years, has been successful both as a summer and after-school program and has effectively enhanced the lives of hundreds of youth in three of the country’s poorest communities (Irvington, Newark and New Brunswick, N.J.).

Each T3 student in these communities participates in a school-based tennis training program that instills life and physical skills such as discipline, desire, responsibility, anaerobic exercise and hand-eye coordination. The students also receive technology training, develop digital commercials, complete science experiments on the Internet and participate in computer-based academic challenges. In addition, the students are taught drama, music, creative writing and visual arts to develop an awareness of their emotions and the emotions of fellow students. Interestingly, tennis, the foundation of the program, makes the technology and theatre curriculum much more effective. The T3 program proves that tennis should be an important part of a public school curriculum.

Two of my greatest thrills in life were teaching tennis with Arthur Ashe and teaching tennis in the Ashe-Bollettieri "Cities" (ABC) Tennis Program in Newark in the late ’80s. These experiences left no doubt in my mind of the virtue in Arthur Ashe’s National Junior Tennis League (NJTL) and the ABC Tennis Program, efforts that grew from his passionate belief that tennis could play a vital role in educating "at
risk" youth.

Given the prevalence of crime and drugs in both suburban and urban communities, all youth in public schools are effectively "at risk." Therefore, in honor of Arthur Ashe and for the long-term growth of the game, tennis’s governing organizations should put together a coordinated effort to integrate tennis into public education in America.

Tennis industry leaders must make every effort to work with organizations like the National School Board Association (NSBA) and the National Education Association (NEA) to develop tennis education programs like T3. This is the only way that tennis can break through the glass ceiling and should be one of the ways schools try to break through to their hard and hardest-to-reach students.

Dale G. Caldwell, deputy commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs, is a teaching professional, a former sectionally and nationally-ranked tennis player and an active member of the New Brunswick Board of Education.

[rew]

TENNIS! TENNIS! TENNIS!

[justvote]

bob said:

You actually think a bunch of tennis courts are going to get more use than a zero recreational pool?

Tennis is a dieing sport.

I'm with you on this one. Although I don't think tennis is a "dying sport", I do believe that swimming is far and away more popular than tennis, overall.

I find it very difficult to believe that tennis courts will generate more revenue than a pool, especially a 50 meter pool, which would be a significant source of income as there are very few in the area.

If you look at the number of kids involved in the Park District's summer swim teams, it totals in the thousands. The populartiy of tennis does not come close to swimming (at least in this town).

[Avenging Eagle]

OK, here are some more neighboring park districts that understand tennis:

Aurora:
foxvalleyparkdistrict.org/facilities/vac/vactennis.html

Elmhurst:
www.epd.org/courts/index.asp

Crystal Lake:
www.theracketclub.net/

Oak Brook:
www.obparks.org/racquet.html

Barrington:
www.sbpd.org/SBC/tennis.htm

So who do you want to believe: Bob, or all of these other park districts.

Bob, I challenge you to try to get a court time at any of these facilities.

Justvote, how can you write off all of these other park districts across the area (and the rest of the country) who have these facilities.

Why did Aurora just build a huge rec center including tennis? Do you think that tennis was listed on their possible amenities list?.

Finally, I was saying that NPD should build ONE OF EACH, instead of 2 pool complexes.

Can you argue with that reasonable compromise?

[rew]

I think while kids enjoy swimming more and playing tennis outside, adults play tennis indoors all winter long. I won't argue that a swimming pool would be used less, but I agree with AE that it would be nice to accomodate both interests.

[EagleDad]

How about a year 'round indoor beer garden?

[momof3]

I think we need both.

Something that got me to thinking, though. In the 'Why Everybody Loves Naperville' article a while back, they mention the new Community Christian Church - the big yellow box at the corner of Rickert and Ogden - it has a basketball court, coffee shop, meeting rooms, it sounds pretty nice. They also mentioned the price tag - 3.5 million. As I was in The (old & run down) Barn for a class, it got me thinking - we are going to sink 35 mil into one facility? I don't know about that. How about 3 smaller, yet nice, facilities that are closer to everyone?
Or how about spending the $25 mil on the rec center (the latest proposal presented - a pool but not a 50 meter pool) and then spending 10 mil on a tennis facility to replace Sportsmen Park (broken record)?

Or do we truly need a 50 meter pool out here so we can help host the 2016 Olympics that Daley is salivating over?
Daley: Chicago Would Be 'Ideal Site' For Olympics
cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_130064224.html

[EagleDad]

OK, I'm a trap and skeet shooter. Is there a reason tennis is better or more deserving?

(Although I have to say this can occur solely at private facilities, IMO)

[momof3]

eagledad said:

OK, I'm a trap and skeet shooter. Is there a reason tennis is better or more deserving?

(Although I have to say this can occur solely at private facilities, IMO)

I just think there is so much opportunity cost wasted on a facility in a prime location that only gets used 2 evenings a week. I also think the garden plots can go, even though I am a gardener. Only a handful of residents use them.

[EagleDad]

Excellent point, I can see the greater good there. Yes, a public facility that was used all the time on that land would be a much better idea.

I can blow the crud out of stuff, and you can watch the turnips grow elsewhere.

[cantretirehere]

I don't think that anything has to be taken away from anyone.

Gardening has its place as does the skeet shooting. Some may argue that perhaps these may be better located somewhere other than they are now. But that is a different issue.

It seems that tennis has been largely ignored by our park district. The only public courts that I am aware of, in this town are at the high schools and these are considered private by the USTA and the schools. There are the courts that the park district grudgingly took over from Ashbury some years ago. So basically, our park district has left it up to the school districts to provide courts, and when the school is using them no one else is allowed on. Is anyone aware of any tennis courts on park district property? Unless the actual property that the Ashbury courts sit on was assumed by the park district, then all the park district is doing is maintaining them in return for the Ashbury HOA letting the public use them. If that is the case then I personally am not aware of ANY tennis courts on park district property.

Talk about underserved!

Aside from that, many people against tennis (really pro something else) argue the numbers.

There has tended to be a pool vs. indoor courts thing going on and I think that is based on cost and space.

We could say that a pool serves more kids because swimming is more popular. Let's take a look at the popularity issue.

A kid learns to swim pretty quickly - at the longest over the course of one summer. After learning to swim as they improve their style they get faster. In a relatively short time they can compete. Maybe not well, but they can. Tennis is vastly different. A kid cannot learn to play tennis in a summer. They will be picking up balls more than actually playing, for a few summers. There is a huge start up time and many years before a kid can play a decent game. Most things that are very difficult aren't popular. That doesn't mean it doesn't have value. It may even mean it has more value.

If we used the argument about serving the most numbers in the context of the school district there would be a riot. One could say that most of the students are average and that since there are less special ed kids and less gifted kids we should not be concerned with them and just add more services for the average kids. Even if the special ed and gifted kids were vastly underserved already. Of course this does not make sense.

So why ignore the tennis lovers just because there are less of them? If you took a show of hands in Naperville and asked every man woman and child how many of them played tennis in the last 3 years and how many played golf in the last 3 years, the tennis players would far outnumber the golfers. Yet we have two golf courses that take up an enormous amount of space and can serve a limited amount of people at one time. Golfers are not being ignored just because there are less of them! It is matter of money.

So tennis has two whammies against it. There are fewer participants and it won't support itself monetarily in the way golfing does. So I guess we should just ignore it - then it will just go away. Oh wait - it has been ignored and it hasn't gone away. I guess it's not dying after all.

[Avenging Eagle]

I might add that it is not always "about the kids".

What about some amenities 204TheRestOfUs?

Why not throw a bone once in a while 204TheSeniors? If you don't, they might stop voting yes for our schools.

What about something 204TheBabyBoomers?

If you believe that everything is for the kids, then we would be living in Neverland Ranch and not Naperville.

My point is that we need to maintain equilibrium in our community...if we go out of balance, then we might end up having an old crabby person shooting a college student who accidentally stepped on their lawn.

[justvote]

avengingeagle said:

Justvote, how can you write off all of these other park districts across the area (and the rest of the country) who have these facilities.

If it is an either or proposition then I believe that the Park District should focus its energies and $$$$ on swimming. If it's not, then I am very supportive of including both tennis courts and a pool(s) in the plans.

I will concede that the Park District has not provided the tennis community with enough resources. There should be more tennis courts built, but NOT at the expense of not building a 50 meter pool. I will also concede that if they decide to build a 25 yard pool (as opposed to a 50 meter one), then I may swing my support to the tennis community. There are a number of 25 yard pools in Naperville, so I'm not convinced we need one more. A 50 meter pool will cost more, but the $$$ benefit far exceeds that of the 25 yard pool. Currently, there are few 50 meter pools in the area that can host long course meets, and those pools are in great demand.