(La Porte, IN) - A lawsuit is promised to try and stop any attempt to relocate Schreiber Field or Kiwanis Field in La Porte.
Attorney Shaw Friedman said he and other members of the community will band together in court, if necessary, to maintain “cherished local landmarks that provide a special character and unique quality to living in a community like LaPorte,” he said.
Friedman, president of his La Porte High School Class of 1977, said both facilities need upgrades and refurbishing but money should not be an issue no matter what the cost.
In a letter to members of the school board and legal counsel for the school corporation, Friedman requested under the Freedom of Information Act copies of any and all architectural and engineering studies commissioned in the past five years on both Schreiber Field and Kiwanis Field.
He also requested copies of any cost estimates for such modernization work along with any cost estimates for demolition.
Friedman is also seeking copies of any emails, memoranda and correspondence sent by or to school corporation administrators or board members on the matter.
“I can indicate to you there will be adamant opposition by myself and many of my classmates to any notion of demolishing or destroying either Schreiber Field or Kiwanis Field as opposed to performing needed refurbishing and upgrades at both facilities,” he stated in his letter.
Last week, La Porte School Board President Jim Arnold said there might be at some point a need for a new field house that could be placed at either Kiwanis Field or Schreiber Field due to lack of available land around the high school.
Arnold said Kiwanis Field needs a lot of work that could be too costly for an aging facility and Schreiber Field might be an option to place a field house if Kiwanis Field was renovated.
He said such a decision would be a tough but sometimes the future has to be chosen over the past if it means progress.
Friedman said Schreiber Field and Kiwanis Field set La Porte apart from the “cookie-cutter cutout athletic complexes in so many communities.”
He said landmarks such as those provide a special character and unique quality to living here and people who appreciate what they offer should not be viewed as “tied to the past.”
“I submit his view is not “progress.” It’s wrongheaded and is most certainly not what is “best for the future” of this community,” Friedman said.