Missed opportunity at a home run for Clark

At some point in our lives, we all have to pay taxes. We have to pay taxes for things we believe are good causes, as well as for things we deem unworthy of our dollars. Whether you are a baseball fan or not, this multi-purpose stadium - make sure you save this phrase in your brain, folks - would have benefited Clark College as a whole.

As of last Tuesday, the opportunity to build a $19.5 million stadium was shot down for the final time at a Board of Clark County Commissioners public hearing.

The initial proposal laid out in the spring was quite flawed, I agree. Proposals are proposals for a reason. Clark College initially was supposed to own the stadium after 20 years, according to Executive Director of Communications and Marketing Barbara Kerr.

However, the latest proposal suggested that Clark would own the stadium right away. This was due to a promise by the Clark College Foundation that $3.5 million would come from the foundation via donations, as stated by Clark College Foundation President and CEO Lisa Gibert.

In turn, the college would have owned the stadium. Under the most recent proposal, the stadium's generated revenue would also have contributed to Clark athletic scholarships.

Let me also bring this to your attention if you are currently unaware of it: The semi-professional Yakima Bears baseball club would have used the facilities only during the summer months, as their 38-game season takes place during the summer.

For the rest of the year, Clark would have had no competition from the team in usage of the stadium. The field's ability to transform would have also allowed the Clark baseball, softball and men's and women's soccer teams to play all their games at the facility.

Graduation is perhaps the key event that would have been held at the proposed stadium. This would have saved the college the thousands of dollars it dishes out annually to rent the Sleep Country Amphitheater. Clark paid $43,620 to rent the amphitheater six months ago, according to Director of Business Services Karen Wynkoop.

Those who opposed the stadium's construction also worried that the parking situation would interrupt life at Clark. This stressing was unnecessary. As I said, the Yakima Bears play all their games during the summer, and many of them take place on the weekend or in the evening, such that it wouldn't have had much of an impact on parking for students or faculty.

Little League baseball and youth soccer events that occur during the school year are held on the weekend or at night, and, in all likelihood, wouldn't have required a significant amount of parking to accomodate.

Another standout advantage of the stadium would have been the attraction of student athletes. Penguin soccer, baseball and softball players currently play on grass fields with two small sets of bleachers. Imagine, if you will, how much more motivated you would be as an athlete to come play for Clark if you could play in a 4,000-seat, lit-up stadium with quality artificial turf.

On a fall trip down to West Salem High School to cover a Clark soccer game for The Independent, I arrived and my first sight was the high school's immense stadium and turf field. Clark has roughly eight times the amount of students that that high school has, yet its stadium is vastly inferior to that of West Salem High.

A stadium like the one proposed would have made the college complete. This was a lost opportunity that would have been expensive but that would have livened up the community. Local businesses would have thrived on business generated from families and from consumers traveling to watch events at the stadium.

Those complaining about the proposed entertainment tax that would have funded the stadium really need to consider the following: It's not like the proposed taxation is on our incomes or on sales of items vital to our lives. We're talking about taxing entertainment, a mere luxury of which we are not required to take advantage.