Quote:
Originally Posted by Skeeter
Good and fair decision. The sport will not be well served on public property (don't go there, Brian...). Keep the sport on private property, where the appropriate industry standards can be followed. This could be an unfair advantage to the owner/operator of the field, or it could negatively affect the sport with injuries or a business failure. Too many unknowns. Keep private enterprise on private property.
|
I might also point out, Skeeter, that Jabba runs a successful municipal paintball operation not very far away from and in the same state as this Boynton fiasco. His operation has be a model for everyone wanting to do the same thing. Now that was as of January of this year. I still think the key to it is a firm contractual relationship where there are no grey areas. And for those who are clueless... Private PB firm has contract w/city for space. Private PB firm supply and run the whole deal, incl insurance. City gets X amount or X percent of monthly intake. This gives PB something run by PB and city what they want in the first place... Bux. But PBr's get municipal facility that works.
Boynton Beach does not want any part of paintball. Their 90 YO mayor would have trouble with his Depends absorbing too much paint...
