U10 Hawks Win Babe Ruth State Softball Championship

By ANDY HUTCHISON

Published: Jul 18, 2008 12:00 am

The U10 Softball team put an exclamation point on its season by winning the State Championship in Stamford last weekend, but the season isnât over yet. The Hawks have earned the right to represent Connecticut at the New England Regional Tournament in Stamford beginning July 25.

In the first round on Friday night, the Hawks beat the Norwalk Zoomers 14-4. As the visiting team, the Hawks jumped on the scoreboard in the top of the first on a single by Mikayla Kuligowski, triple by Caitlyn Linden, and singles from Shannon Mullins and Emily Woznick. The Hawks put up a run in the second and two more in the third before breaking out with six runs in the fifth as Kuligowski, Mullins, Woznick, Aimee Alexander, Katie Mossbarger, Katie Laaksonen, and Gillian Galante all had singles. In the final inning, Newtown added a few insurance runs on hits by Kuligowski and Woznick and a fielderâs choice by Kelly Merrick. Newtownâs batters combined for 18 hits and pitchers Galante, Kuligowski, and Lauren Wilcox held Norwalk to four runs on two hits as they combined for ten strikeouts and five put-outs.

In the second game Friday night, the Hawks faced the Southbury Heat and came away with another 14-4 victory despite falling behind 3-0 in the first inning. Kuligowski pitched well the first three innings, turning the game over to Wilcox with an 11-3 lead. Wilcox struck out seven batters and allowed only two hits. Newtown worked 14 walks in the game. Woznick hit a bases-loaded double for three RBIs, Laaksonen had a double and Kathryn Kerins and Linden each contributed a single as the Hawks advanced to the winnerâs bracket final on Saturday.

On Saturday afternoon, the Hawks played the host team, the Stamford Stars, to determine the winnerâs bracket finalist. Galante turned in a superb game, tossing a no-hitter with 13 strikeouts in the 8-1 win. The Hawks jumped out to an early 1-0 lead as Kuligowski walked and scored on Woznickâs base hit. In the third, the runs came in a hurry as Wilcox, Kuligowski, and Linden got on board with singles and later scored as Mullins walked and Alexander singled. Galante aided her own cause as she lead off with a single in the fourth, stole second and third base, and scored on a fielderâs choice by Kerins.

The Hawks returned to the field on Sunday to see Stamford win the loserâs bracket final over Norwalk and earn a rematch with Newtown for the championship. Since Newtown was still undefeated, Stamford would have to beat the Hawks twice in order to win the championship. In a hard-fought game, the Hawks went down 11-10 as the lead changed nearly every inning and the Hawks struggled in the field. Kuligowski had two singles, Mullins had a single and a double with two RBIs, and Alexander, Woznick and Haley Ryan added singles. Down by a run in the bottom of the sixth, Kerins lead off with a single to put the tying run on base. After she stole second and third, the Hawks looked poised to tie the game but failed to put the ball in play, stranding the runner at third. Kuligowski went the distance with eight strikeouts, including two in the final inning.

Despite the letdown of the loss, the Hawks kept their heads up and entered the final game loose and ready to make amends for the earlier loss. They prevailed with an 8-1 win. Visitors again, the girls tallied four quick runs in the first inning off walks to Linden and Mullins and a double by Woznick followed by an error that got Alexander on base and a two-run double by Mossbarger. The Hawks had another big inning in the fourth, scoring five more runs on singles by Galante and Woznick, walks by Kerins and Mullins, and productive groundouts by Kuligowski and Ryan that each brought in a run. In the sixth, Galante and Molly Begg earned walks, but didnât make it around to score. The story of the game was the pitching of Galante, who struck out the side in the first and fifth and in the bottom of the sixth struck out two more on her way to a ten-strikeout, five-hit performance that earned her the tournament MVP award. Kuligowski fielded the final out at short stop and made the perfect throw to Mullins to capture the championship.

St Rose Parish Welcomes New Parochial Vicar

Youth Cheerleaders And Basketball Players Get Pointers From High School Athletes

Andersen Tale To Continue Richter Summer Season

Future Nighthawks And Current Varsity Players Alike Benefit From Summer Soccer Camp

When Life Gives You A Lemonade Stand ... Play Basketball

It’s important to clarify the tone and context of Derek Pisani’s remarks, particularly the satirical line about suing Newtown for "Gross Stupidity." This was clearly a tongue-in-cheek jab at the exhausting culture of legal threats that’s become a staple on the local Facebook Group forums. It was a reflection of frustration over endless regulatory hurdles and obstructionism, and the desire to avoid common sense solutions not an insult aimed at residents. Satire, is meant to provoke thought and highlight the absurdities. If we are unable to distinguish between satire and literal threats, perhaps the comment hit closer to the truth than we’d like to admit. Rather than focusing on Pisanis style, we should be discussing the substance of what he’s pointing out: that Newtown’s progress is being routinely blocked by a small but vocal contingent who seem intent on saying “no” at every turn. They are saying no to any development, no to common sense solutions to crowd control, etc. Newtown deserves leaders who are willing to call things as they see them, even if their language ruffles feathers. That doesn’t mean they lack respect for constituents—it means they care enough to challenge the Mob and push for solutions. Isn't that what we elect people to do? I applaud Pisani's dedication, he certainly has earned my vote. Regardless, let’s not reduce conversation to tone-policing and outrage. Let’s focus on the issues that matter.

Who is Calling Newtowners Stupid?

Thank you for pointing out the trail access provisions included in the BOS motion—it’s an important clarification that deserves more attention in this conversation. If the development is, in fact, required to provide permanent free public access and commit to ongoing maintenance of this section of the Rochambeau Trail, that is a remarkably beneficial outcome for the town. oIt’s not every day that a private project shoulders the long-term burden of preserving and caring for a public historical corridor at no taxpayer cost—especially one that previously had no formal access, upkeep, or visibility. Let’s be honest: the idea that the only way to protect history is by preventing any development nearby is a rigid and unworkable standard. What’s being proposed here appears to strike a rare balance—historic preservation, public access, and smart development all rolled into one. That’s not a loss its a win. So rather than allowing a handful of voices to derail progress under the banner of “historic purity,” maybe it’s time to acknowledge the reality: this trail is better off with structured stewardship and visibility than remaining an overgrown ghost on old maps. Let’s move forward. Bring in the easement, bring in the public access—and yes, bring in the bulldozers!!! Progress and preservation can coexist. Let’s not let the NIMBY use fear or nostalgia keep us stuck in the past.

Discusses Rochambeau Trail And 6 Commerce Road

I've heard that several people are under the impression that the public might be banned from the Rochambeau Trail. Points 2 and 3 from the BOS motion (included in full below) make it clear that public access to the trail is part of the requirements for the developer. From what I understand, it requires free public access to the trail in perpetuity. Technically, this could be argued to be a "payment-in-kind," that attempts to balance public good with overall town growth. We can argue about weather that balance is acceptable and how the trail may be affected, but with the understanding that the trail is expected to be maintained as a publicly accessible trail regardless. July 15, 2024 Board of Selectmen approved motion: Discontinuance of Reservoir Road: Selectman Cruson moved the resolution: Resolved, that the Newtown Board of Selectmen, in accordance with Section 2-115(d)(8) of the Town Charter and Conn. Gen. Stat. §13a-49, and subject to the conditions set forth below, hereby discontinues an unimproved portion of Reservoir Road described as “Portion of Reservoir Road to be Discontinued “on that certain survey map which will be recorded on the Newtown Land Records titled “Map Showing Portion of Reservoir Road to be Discontinued” dated August, 2023 and revised September 15, 2023, and certified substantially correct by Gregory Szyszowski of SLR (the “Survey Map”), said discontinuance contingent and effective only upon the completion of the following: 1. The approval of an application for the development of land in the manner described in a letter from Attorney Thomas W. Beecher to First Selectman A. Jeffrey Capeci and Members of the Board of Selectmen dated May 30, 2024, pursuant to the “Residential Open Space Development” regulations of the Borough of Newtown by the Borough of Newtown Zoning Commission, and construction of that approval project within the timeframes required for special exception approval; 2. The inclusion of the discontinued portion of the road as part of the final Declaration of Conservation Restriction; 3. The conveyance of a mutually agreeable public easement to the Town of Newtown for pedestrian, bicycling, equestrian, and all other passive recreational uses (to exclude the use of motorized vehicles except as may be necessary by the Town or its designee to effectuate the purpose of the easement), and for municipal utility purposes; Be it further resolved, that Castle Hill Real Estate Holdings, LLC., its successors and assigns, shall not use any portion of the discontinued road as a vehicular road or access way to and from any developed portions of the property. Be it further finally resolved, that should any of the foregoing contingencies not occur, then the discontinuance contemplated herein shall not become effective and this resolution will become null and void. From: https://www.newtown-ct.gov/sites/g/files/vyhlif12216/f/minutes/bos_7-15-24_min-_att_final.pdf

Is this paper road (roads that only exist on paper map but not in reality) even owned by the Town? Many roads that predate the Town's road standards are privately owned and were never accepted by the Town, such as many of the nonconforming roads around the lake communities where the property owners own right to the center line. That is something we had to deal with when working on the Roads Ordinance a few years back. We also had to deal with a private road to run the utilities to the new SHS.

For anyone who wants to know, I cant post a link here, but Housatonic Resources Recovery Authority has an entire website. Look up "HRRA whats in whats out"

I Get It!

<< Jul 2025 >>
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
29	30	1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31	1	2

Log In

U10 Hawks Win Babe Ruth State Softball Championship

Leave a Reply Cancel reply