Champaign School Board approves softball renovations, house demolition
CHAMPAIGN, Ill. (WCIA) — The Champaign School Board approved the design and estimate plans for renovations to Centennial High School's softball field.
The approval comes after Title IX advocates shined a light on the difference between Centennial's softball and baseball fields. WCIA reported that the differences in the baseball and softball fields were brought up last March.
Champaign Co. Board approves 12-month carbon sequestration ban
During Monday night's board meeting, district officials said the softball field was outdated and needed improvements. The board approved the over $1 million project with four members voting yes, one voting no and one abstaining from the vote.
The improvements to the field will include elevated score boxes, a concessions area, a public address system, enclosed dugouts with storage and field lighting.
The money will come from referendum funding and the county school facility tax funding.
IL State Board of Education asks districts to prepare for ICE arriving on school grounds
District officials said that the next step in the process is going out to bid. Then, the bids will be reviewed in March. Officials also said they are hopeful that construction will begin this summer.
After the softball renovations were approved, the board turned to their next agenda item. They discussed whether to approve the demolition of a house next to Franklin STEAM Academy, located at 714 W Harvard St.
The district bought the house in 2015, where it has been used for storage and staff use. Now however, staff are being moved out because it has become, 'not suitable for use as a staff workplace.' The roof needs to be replaced, the basement floods and the house has become a drain on the district.
Champaign workout equipment customizes to every user
District officials proposed demolishing the house and using the space for staff parking. They estimate it will cost $95,000 and will use funds from the county school facility tax.
The board unanimously approved the project. Next steps include seeking proposals for asbestos abatement, which they hope to start by the end of February. Then, the plan is to demolish the house as soon as the ground thaws.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox Sports
44 minutes ago
- Fox Sports
Female athletes appeal landmark NCAA settlement, claiming it violates Title IX
Eight female athletes filed an appeal Wednesday of a landmark NCAA antitrust settlement, arguing that women would not receive their fair share of $2.7 billion in back pay for athletes who were barred from making money off their name, image and likeness. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken approved the settlement last week, clearing the way for direct payments from universities to athletes and the end of the NCAA's amateurism model. The athletes who appealed the settlement competed in soccer, volleyball and track. They are: Kacie Breeding of Vanderbilt; Lexi Drumm, Emma Appleman, Emmie Wannemacher, Riley Hass, Savannah Baron and Elizabeth Arnold of the College of Charleston; and Kate Johnson of Virginia. They have standing to appeal because they previously filed objections to the proposed settlement. Ashlyn Hare, one of the attorneys representing the athletes, said in a statement that the settlement violates Title IX, the federal law that bans sex-based discrimination in education. "We support a settlement of the case, but not an inaccurate one that violates federal law. The calculation of past damages is based on an error that ignores Title IX and deprives female athletes of $1.1 billion," Hare said. "Paying out the money as proposed would be a massive error that would cause irreparable harm to women's sports." The House settlement figures to financially benefit football and basketball stars at the biggest schools, who are likely to receive a big chunk of the $20.5 million per year that colleges are permitted to share with athletes over the next year. Some athletes in other sports that don't make money for their schools could lose their partial scholarships or see their roster spots cut. "This is a football and basketball damages settlement with no real benefit to female athletes," Hare said. "Congress has expressly rejected efforts to exempt revenue-generating sports like football and basketball from Title IX's antidiscrimination mandate. The NCAA agreed with us. Our argument on appeal is the exact same argument the conferences and NCAA made prior to settling the case." The appeal was filed by the law firm Hutchinson Black and Cook of Boulder, Colorado, and was first reported by Front Office Sports. It would be heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Reporting by The Associated Press. Want great stories delivered right to your inbox? Create or log in to your FOX Sports account, follow leagues, teams and players to receive a personalized newsletter daily ! FOLLOW Follow your favorites to personalize your FOX Sports experience NCAA Women's Soccer NCAA Women's Volleyball NCAA Women's Track and Field recommended Get more from College Football Follow your favorites to get information about games, news and more
Hamilton Spectator
an hour ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Female athletes appeal landmark NCAA settlement, saying it violates federal antidiscrimination law
Eight female athletes filed an appeal Wednesday of a landmark NCAA antitrust settlement, arguing that women would not receive their fair share of $2.7 billion in back pay for athletes who were barred from making money off their name, image and likeness. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken approved the settlement last week, clearing the way for direct payments from universities to athletes and the end of the NCAA's amateurism model. The athletes who appealed the settlement competed in soccer, volleyball and track. They are: Kacie Breeding of Vanderbilt; Lexi Drumm, Emma Appleman, Emmie Wannemacher, Riley Hass, Savannah Baron and Elizabeth Arnold of the College of Charleston; and Kate Johnson of Virginia. They have standing to appeal because they previously filed objections to the proposed settlement. Ashlyn Hare, one of the attorneys representing the athletes, said in a statement that the settlement violates Title IX, the federal law that bans sex-based discrimination in education. 'We support a settlement of the case, but not an inaccurate one that violates federal law. The calculation of past damages is based on an error that ignores Title IX and deprives female athletes of $1.1 billion,' Hare said. 'Paying out the money as proposed would be a massive error that would cause irreparable harm to women's sports.' The House settlement figures to financially benefit football and basketball stars at the biggest schools, who are likely to receive a big chunk of the $20.5 million per year that colleges are permitted to share with athletes over the next year. Some athletes in other sports that don't make money for their schools could lose their partial scholarships or see their roster spots cut. 'This is a football and basketball damages settlement with no real benefit to female athletes,' Hare said. 'Congress has expressly rejected efforts to exempt revenue-generating sports like football and basketball from Title IX's antidiscrimination mandate. The NCAA agreed with us. Our argument on appeal is the exact same argument the conferences and NCAA made prior to settling the case.' The appeal was filed by the law firm Hutchinson Black and Cook of Boulder, Colorado, and was first reported by Front Office Sports. It would be heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. ___ AP college sports: Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Chicago Tribune
2 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
Female athletes appeal landmark NCAA settlement, saying it violates federal antidiscrimination law
Eight female athletes filed an appeal Wednesday of a landmark NCAA antitrust settlement, arguing that women would not receive their fair share of $2.7 billion in back pay for athletes who were barred from making money off their name, image and likeness. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken approved the settlement last week, clearing the way for direct payments from universities to athletes and the end of the NCAA's amateurism model. The athletes who appealed the settlement competed in soccer, volleyball and track. They are: Kacie Breeding of Vanderbilt; Lexi Drumm, Emma Appleman, Emmie Wannemacher, Riley Hass, Savannah Baron and Elizabeth Arnold of the College of Charleston; and Kate Johnson of Virginia. They have standing to appeal because they previously filed objections to the proposed settlement. Ashlyn Hare, one of the attorneys representing the athletes, said in a statement that the settlement violates Title IX, the federal law that bans sex-based discrimination in education. 'We support a settlement of the case, but not an inaccurate one that violates federal law. The calculation of past damages is based on an error that ignores Title IX and deprives female athletes of $1.1 billion,' Hare said. 'Paying out the money as proposed would be a massive error that would cause irreparable harm to women's sports.' The House settlement figures to financially benefit football and basketball stars at the biggest schools, who are likely to receive a big chunk of the $20.5 million per year that colleges are permitted to share with athletes over the next year. Some athletes in other sports that don't make money for their schools could lose their partial scholarships or see their roster spots cut. 'This is a football and basketball damages settlement with no real benefit to female athletes,' Hare said. 'Congress has expressly rejected efforts to exempt revenue-generating sports like football and basketball from Title IX's antidiscrimination mandate. The NCAA agreed with us. Our argument on appeal is the exact same argument the conferences and NCAA made prior to settling the case.' The appeal was filed by the law firm Hutchinson Black and Cook of Boulder, Colorado, and was first reported by Front Office Sports. It would be heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
