Mount Vernon officials outline Memorial Field operations, project $406,500 revenue for 2025

Commissioner Kathleen Walker Pinckney, the city’s Commissioner of Recreation, told the City Council at a recent meeting that Memorial Field — reopened under the city’s jurisdiction in January 2023 — is heavily booked for 2025 and is on track to generate about $406,500 in revenue this year while the adopted budget target remains $500,000.

Why it matters: Council members pressed for an expense breakdown, a list of upgrades and price adjustments, and a clearer assessment of whether Memorial Field should be treated primarily as a revenue-generating asset or a taxpayer-supported public good. That information will inform decisions about fees, capital spending and whether third‑party management or further city investment is warranted.

“Memorial Field has reopened under the city's jurisdiction and leadership in January of 20 23,” Commissioner Kathleen Walker Pinckney said as she opened the department’s presentation. She framed the work at the stadium as a multi-year effort and said, “we have developed a formal 3, 5, and 10 year strategic plan.”

Deputy Commissioner Andre Early and Rick Wright, director of Memorial Field operations, reviewed the venue’s calendar, tenant list and revenue drivers. Wright said the field is already hosting college and club tenants and special events: Monroe University uses it as a home field, the Westchester soccer club and the New York Exiles (women’s professional rugby and an ultimate frisbee national championship) have scheduled games, and local high schools including Mount Vernon High School and Pelham High School are on the calendar. Wright said the venue has been booked through November and staff continue to receive event inquiries.

Officials described key operational constraints and revenue lines. The outdoor season is handled as April 1 through Oct. 31; the facility is open to the public for jogging and general use daily (6 a.m.–10 a.m. and 5 p.m.–8 p.m.), while rental activity and events occupy other hours. Pinckney and Wright cited a Harvard study used as a planning benchmark that suggested three‑, five‑ and ten‑year revenue scenarios. Wright summarized those benchmarks as roughly $300,000 at three years, $500,000 at five years and about $850,000 at ten years, and said the department is “on target to come, if not to that mark, very close to it.”

Council members focused on profitability and the mix of revenue sources. Councilman Thompson said the city needs expense data before deciding whether the field is intended to be revenue-neutral or subsidized by taxpayers and asked staff to break out concession and rental income from other fees. Wright and staff said concessions are currently a “dry concession” with limited kitchen infrastructure and little point‑of‑sale capability; until that is upgraded concessions generate only modest receipts (staff estimated a few hundred dollars on a busy day). Wright said advertising and sponsorships brought about $35,000 last year, banner placements run about $2,500–$4,500 annually depending on size, and a street‑side billboard option is priced at roughly $250 per week with a four‑week minimum.

On fees and booking, staff said current rental and permit fees derive from the municipal charter and have not been updated in decades; tennis access is managed by season permits via the CommunityPass platform, with approximate seasonal permit prices discussed around $35–$50 (staff cautioned that figure was approximate and drawn from legacy fee schedules). Councilman Thompson said he will work with the commissioner, deputy commissioner and the legislative aide, Miss Anderson, to compare Mount Vernon’s fees to neighboring municipalities and prepare recommended adjustments.

Several council members raised facility limits that affect revenue potential. Speakers noted the stadium seats roughly 4,000 and lacks some amenities expected by college or professional tenants (limited locker room capacity, minimal concessions infrastructure and no enclosed year‑round structure). Council members discussed longer‑term capital decisions such as replacing sun‑degraded plastic seating over time, enclosing parts of the stadium, and upgrading concessions; staff cautioned that a full turf replacement or major repairs can be costly.

Council discussion also weighed management options. Commissioners and Wright said they explored private management firms but found proposals that required large retainers (one figure cited was $600,000) plus revenue shares, and argued city control provides continuity and protective oversight of turf and programming. Wright said the department is following the Harvard study’s recommendations where feasible and asked the council for patience as the venue completes its third year under city operation.

Next steps: Council members requested an itemized expense report for Memorial Field (utility bills, staffing, maintenance), a prioritized list of potential upgrades with estimated costs and projected incremental revenue, and a proposed schedule of updated permit and rental fees for council review. Councilman Thompson said his office will lead the fee review with legislative aide Miss Anderson.

Pinckney concluded the presentation noting that rebuilding relationships and credibility with residents and partners is part of the facility’s recovery: “Rebuilding trust, reestablishing credibility, and enhancing our reputation in the eyes of residents and partners. These are the currencies of long term success,” she said.

The presentation did not include a formal council vote on policy or capital funding; council members asked staff to return with the requested financial detail and upgrade estimates.