1st UCD, now Claremont Stadium

Testosterscone

https://www.change.org/p/meath-county-council-save-claremont-stadium/nftexp4/fb_share_copy_3/8911956?recruiter=8911956&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=autopublish.guest_form_reduction&utm_content=nafta_share_post_title_en_7%3Afb_share_copy_3

Despite being the 3rd biggest county in terms of athletics in the country (behind Dublin and Cork in terms of membership numbers at Juvenile level and overall) Meath is set to lose one of its 2 tartan tracks.

karkar athlete

Meath does have a very large AAI membership with significant juvenile section however it also has a wide road running community which accounts for vast majority of adults/master membership. Very few T&F athletes in county going through till Senior.

Meath only has one tartan track and it's Claremont. Unfortunately though the track has really seen better days and needs some serious investment to keep it viable. In places the track is completely worn to black underlay and cracks/splits in track. Dunboyne has 400m meter track but I believe it is tarmacadam, Cushinstown has 400m grass track and Bohermeen has 400m tartan but is only two lanes.

However the issue is not just related to the track but the overall stadium going into receivership including football pitch, hall and associated building so in that respect it's a little different to UCD.

MisterDrak

Not in the same league as either of the tracks above, but the old cinder track in Killbarrack was removed to make way of a all weather football pitch last year.

Murph_D

MisterDrak wrote: »

Not in the same league as either of the tracks above, but the old cinder track in Killbarrack was removed to make way of a all weather football pitch last year.

Really? Was of a mind to check it out one of these days as I haven't been out there for a while. To be fai it didn't seem to get any use at all, based on the state if it.

MisterDrak

Yep, but when its relatively close to your house, and always deserted, even a poorly maintained 400m track is a luxury...
Before its removal, I was going to suggest a North Side Winter beer mile on it:mad:

Wubble Wubble

Down where the Dublin City Council pitches are now (backing onto the railway line in Clontarf Fairview) there used to be a track going around a bunch of five a side pitches.

average_runner

Wubble Wubble wrote: »

Down where the Dublin City Council pitches are now (backing onto the railway line in Clontarf Fairview) there used to be a track going around a bunch of five a side pitches.

That was really run down though. Used to be some type of driving school there also.

Used to run there when I worked in Eastpoint.

While its a pity it got replaced, the new pitches are a better use of the space there.

Murph_D

Well yes, but why not both? Loads of room there.

Back in Black

http://lindienaughton.com/claremont-stadium-when-the-dream-turns-sour

Good article on what went wrong at Claremont Stadium and highlights the problems that face facilities such as Claremont.

The bit below is the nub of the issue. Having a great facility is brilliant for clubs but it can be a noose around the neck of clubs in terms of having the cash and resources to maintain it without dragging the club under.

Imagine this scenario: you are a sports club and want to lay down a new pitch
or track; or maybe build a club house for the use of your members and the
community.


This will cost, say, €500,000. You apply for a grant and are delighted to
hear that if you can raise half that sum, Lottery funding will supply the rest.
You hold raffles and fashion nights and road races; you might even set up a club lottery to bring in the funds. It still isn’t enough. So you go to the bank and ask for a loan.


Soon you have a spanking new facility. What you may not have fully realised is that your problems have only begun. Where will you get the money to maintain this facility, which is a lot more draining on the finances than a Portacabin and a field? To pay the bills, you’ll have to keep it open all day and most evenings. You’ll have to apply for every grant going, which means days if not
weeks of form-filling, emails and phone calls. Since you are all volunteers,
you’ll have to find staff and you’ll have to pay them.


Soon, with all the drains on your resources, you may find that you can ‘t
repay that loan you took out to build the facility in the first place.


Such is the scenario hitting a number of sports clubs around the country. The recession that hit ten years ago hasn’t helped. Everyone has noticed the number of high-profile golf clubs going bankrupt or quietly folding, but many other clubs are also suffering.


“The government gave money to clubs to build the facilities, but they don’t
offer the support that’s needed after the facility is built,” says Marjan Boers,
who has managed Claremont Stadium in Navan for the past seven years.

happygoose

Back in Black wrote: »

http://lindienaughton.com/claremont-stadium-when-the-dream-turns-sour

Good article on what went wrong at Claremont Stadium and highlights the problems that face facilities such as Claremont.

The bit below is the nub of the issue. Having a great facility is brilliant for clubs but it can be a noose around the neck of clubs in terms of having the cash and resources to maintain it without dragging the club under.

I don't think general club maintenance costs are an issue here, its the debt maintenance that's the problem and its hard to gauge the severity of it without knowing how much it costs them to service their debt every year.

Murph_D

Indeed. Clonliffe Harriers struggled mightily to afford the upkeep of Santry Stadium, eventually turning it over to the Dublin Corporation in the late 1970s. It's now run by the National Sports Campus people. Irishtown Stadium is owned and managed by Dublin City Council, with Crusaders having to periodically renegotiate their access rights. So the burden of maintenance is not held by the clubs. I presume it's a different story at Tallaght AC?

Ballina has a terrific tartan facility which appears to be completely open to the public at all times (unless they just hadn't build the fences yet when I visited earlier this year!) - I assume it is publicly owned and managed?

Back in Black

happygoose wrote: »

I don't think general club maintenance costs are an issue here, its the debt maintenance that's the problem and its hard to gauge the severity of it without knowing how much it costs them to service their debt every year.

I don't know enough about the particular case to comment but I would imagine it's indicative of a huge problem around the country as even getting the match funding for these facilities is a massive burden for clubs and one that is sometimes forgotten once the facility is in place.

A similar scenario faces soccer clubs/ hockey clubs who get funding for pitches and then struggle to keep it going/ service the debt that was incurred in raising the funding in the first instance and these clubs could be brought down by debt or the facility falls into disrepair.

I presume tartan tracks, like astro turf pitches have a finite lifespan and there is a massive cost to clubs in raising funds to replace/repair the surfaces.

average_runner

Our club are in the process of doing it. We got a grant for 200,000 but its going to cost 500,000 to get it all done.

The club are working hard on fund raising etc, not sure what the maintenance cost will be but suppose the membership fee will try to cover it.

But the problem i see is that every club wants its own track which is fair enough, but with membership of clubs around 500 or so, is that realistic?

happygoose

I agree, this facility is no different than any other in the country, belonging to any voluntary / community / sports club. Current costs are hard to manage, but you’ve thousands of clubs across the country, managing fine.

My local GAA club costs upward of €150k to run a year, with €70k of that being a loan, however they’re meeting their current costs.

My local athletic club can more than meet their current costs.

Whilst I sympathise with the plight of Claremont Stadium, and disagree with the sale of sports facilities to vulture funds, I don’t see this facility being sold. I don’t see local councillors voting to rezone a recreational facility in their own constituency for private gain.

I don’t really get the comment by Marjan Boers, however. Their current costs can’t be exorbitant.

I’m sure income from Navan AC / Parkvilla AC can meet the current costs of the facility.

Navan AC membership numbers looks healthy, approaching 300. That should net €25k a year. Their races do well in terms of numbers, 3 x annual races, talking c. €10k. €35k a year in total. That’s outside of fundraisers, track hire etc.

Parkvilla are, afaik, the main soccer teams in Navan.

Navan is a town of 30,000 people – that’s a resource that should be relatively easy to tap into in terms of generating income through increased membership due to the boom in mass participation running.

Debt is the problem, borrowing for projects by organisations and failure to meet these debts.

The current sports capital grant programme is run in a way that scores clubs well for frontloading money for capital projects, which looks to be the best form of resource allocation given what we see happening in Navan.

Perhaps Claremont will be given some support by Meath Co. Co., as owners of the leasehold, as it wouldn’t be a popular move for local councillors to allow this piece of land to be used for anything other than sports facilities.

Perhaps the profile of this case in the media will create enough pressure on Meath Co. Co. to accept the sum of money Claremont have offered for the facility. That’s what looks like is going on to me.

The government aren’t to blame though, it’s a poor excuse. I don’t see a better way to allocate resources to clubs than through the sports capital grant model, and public funds shouldn’t be used to bail out poorly managed facilities.

happygoose

average_runner wrote: »

But the problem i see is that every club wants its own track which is fair enough, but with membership of clubs around 500 or so, is that realistic?

500 members = membership of €40k annually.
Fundraising and other income €20k.
Current expenditure annually in a club of that size, €20k.
Capital upgrades / exceptional costs €5k.
Clearing €35k annually, before specific fundraising for a track, I think it’s doable.

average_runner

happygoose wrote: »

500 members = membership of €40k annually.
Fundraising and other income €20k.
Current expenditure annually in a club of that size, €20k.
Capital upgrades / exceptional costs €5k.
Clearing €35k annually, before specific fundraising for a track, I think it’s doable.

Any track damage will cost more than 5k!
And your not going to fundraise 20k every year, when competing with other sports in the area.


PS Your local GAA club gets funding from the GAA also.

Back in Black

happygoose wrote: »

I agree, this facility is no different than any other in the country, belonging to any voluntary / community / sports club. Current costs are hard to manage, but you’ve thousands of clubs across the country, managing fine.

My local GAA club costs upward of €150k to run a year, with €70k of that being a loan, however they’re meeting their current costs.

My local athletic club can more than meet their current costs.

Whilst I sympathise with the plight of Claremont Stadium, and disagree with the sale of sports facilities to vulture funds, I don’t see this facility being sold. I don’t see local councillors voting to rezone a recreational facility in their own constituency for private gain.

I don’t really get the comment by Marjan Boers, however. Their current costs can’t be exorbitant.

I’m sure income from Navan AC / Parkvilla AC can meet the current costs of the facility.

Navan AC membership numbers looks healthy, approaching 300. That should net €25k a year. Their races do well in terms of numbers, 3 x annual races, talking c. €10k. €35k a year in total. That’s outside of fundraisers, track hire etc.

Parkvilla are, afaik, the main soccer teams in Navan.

Navan is a town of 30,000 people – that’s a resource that should be relatively easy to tap into in terms of generating income through increased membership due to the boom in mass participation running.

Debt is the problem, borrowing for projects by organisations and failure to meet these debts.

The current sports capital grant programme is run in a way that scores clubs well for frontloading money for capital projects, which looks to be the best form of resource allocation given what we see happening in Navan.

Perhaps Claremont will be given some support by Meath Co. Co., as owners of the leasehold, as it wouldn’t be a popular move for local councillors to allow this piece of land to be used for anything other than sports facilities.

Perhaps the profile of this case in the media will create enough pressure on Meath Co. Co. to accept the sum of money Claremont have offered for the facility. That’s what looks like is going on to me.

The government aren’t to blame though, it’s a poor excuse. I don’t see a better way to allocate resources to clubs than through the sports capital grant model, and public funds shouldn’t be used to bail out poorly managed facilities.

I agree with an awful lot of what you posted but the reality is that Claremont is struggling with the track, in particular, being in a bad state for quiet a while so whatever money is coming in is not allowing for the proper upkeep of the facility.

I would have also thought that the "Claremont model" was the way forward for rural towns where athletics and soccer, rugby, hockey etc aren't as strong as they would be in the cities and have a limited pool of people to tap into. I don't think it's that easy to tap into 30,000 people in Navan for athletics (or to get a decent percentage of that 30,000 to become paid up members of the club at any rate). To me it makes sense for clubs in towns like Navan to get together and pool resources/ share facilities rather than trying to get their own track/ pitch/ ground etc. And to see Claremont in such a predicament is a big worry.

A huge part of the problem in rural Ireland is access to land to be able to develop facilities. That's a massive outlay for any club. Then to develop the land is another huge cost for the club and will put massive debt on the club as grants won't fund the full cost of the development.

I do think there are fundamental flaws in the Sports Capital Grants scheme and more help is needed for clubs and to provide proper sporting facilities across the country.

I would agree that public funds shouldn't be used to bail out poorly managed clubs. However there is a need for a fundamental look at the Sports Capital Grants model if we are serious about providing sports facilities in this country - something like municipal sporting facilities would be a good place to start. I think the Government would get a lot more bang for their buck if this approach was taken and it would make sports facilities more sustainable.

happygoose

average_runner wrote: »

Any track damage will cost more than 5k!
And your not going to fundraise 20k every year, when competing with other sports in the area.


PS Your local GAA club gets funding from the GAA also.

Exceptional upgrades - look at your treasurers report from your AGM - you'll see the costs you're looking for in terms of I&E in there AR - all the sums!

I beg to differ on the fundraising - but if its the case that your club can't, well, I fail to see how your Club can afford a tartan track.

average_runner

Back in Black wrote: »

I agree with an awful lot of what you posted but the reality is that Claremont is struggling with the track, in particular, being in a bad state for quiet a while so whatever money is coming in is not allowing for the proper upkeep of the facility.

I would have also thought that the "Claremont model" was the way forward for rural towns where athletics and soccer, rugby, hockey etc aren't as strong as they would be in the cities and have a limited pool of people to tap into. I don't think it's that easy to tap into 30,000 people in Navan for athletics (or to get a decent percentage of that 30,000 to become paid up members of the club at any rate). To me it makes sense for clubs in towns like Navan to get together and pool resources/ share facilities rather than trying to get their own track/ pitch/ ground etc. And to see Claremont in such a predicament is a big worry.

A huge part of the problem in rural Ireland is access to land to be able to develop facilities. That's a massive outlay for any club. Then to develop the land is another huge cost for the club and will put massive debt on the club as grants won't fund the full cost of the development.

I do think there are fundamental flaws in the Sports Capital Grants scheme and more help is needed for clubs and to provide proper sporting facilities across the country.

I would agree that public funds shouldn't be used to bail out poorly managed clubs. However there is a need for a fundamental look at the Sports Capital Grants model if we are serious about providing sports facilities in this country - something like municipal sporting facilities would be a good place to start. I think the Government would get a lot more bang for their buck if this approach was taken and it would make sports facilities more sustainable.

"municipal sporting facilities would be a good place to start"

This would be great, but its not the government preventing this, its the sport themselves that do that. They just don't want to work together.

Some sports share club houses and it ends up a total disaster as they cant get on which is sad.

davedanon

average_runner wrote: »

"municipal sporting facilities would be a good place to start"

This would be great, but its not the government preventing this, its the sport themselves that do that. They just don't want to work together.

Some sports share club houses and it ends up a total disaster as they cant get on which is sad.

For whatever reason, every club in every sport in Ireland seems to be riven with inter-personal squabbles, power struggles and just plain enmity. It's hard enough getting people who are all on the same side to get along without trying to get separate clubs to mesh together, it seems.

Tallaght AC is possibly a rare example as it is composed of THREE separate clubs that all agreed to merge and work towards building the new clubhouse and tartan track. And by the by, as far as I'm aware we cover maintenance costs ourselves, although we are grant-aided to some degree, I think.

Back in Black

The problem with sporting facilities is symptomatic of a lot of issues around the provision of services in this country and why a new model is needed. It's also why I believe the Sports Capital/ grant provision models are fundamentally flawed and will never address the issues of sports facilities, especially in rural Ireland.

Clubs don't have the capital in most instances to develop their own proper facilities and get into huge debt or lose their volunteers and good will to wading through the whole grant getting process/ fund raising.

Clubs won't merge as davedanon says because of rivalries, etc, etc and end up fighting for the same resources and we end up with a shockingly poor sporting infrastructure that is unsustainable outside the main cities.

The grant schemes such as sports capital, while very welcome to the clubs that receive fund, are not delivering proper infrastructure or value for money for the taxpayer and are not doing a lot for supporting the development of sport in this country. Take a look at the allocation under the last round of sports capital - it's the classic something for everyone model that seems to prevail with every grant scheme!!

I would love to see an alternative model of municipal facilities provided and shared by sports and available to all. C0lubs could then focus their resources and volunteers on coaching and increasing participation in the sport. I don't think it would cost a whole lot more than what is being spent at present and would make a real difference.