Kingman council reviews feasibility study recommending mid-size sports and recreation center; no decision taken

The Kingman City Council on Aug. 5 received a market feasibility study from CSL International that recommended a mid-size sports-event and recreation center (roughly 65,000 square feet with four full-size basketball courts) as a balanced option between a community recreation center and a tournament-focused fieldhouse. Council took no formal action but asked staff to schedule follow-up discussion.

The study, presented by consultant Tyler Olthon and introduced by Bennett Bradley, summarized demographic and industry research, a stakeholder outreach program and a community survey of about 1,600 respondents. Olthon said the outreach produced “a great turnout of over 1,600 respondents” and that the study weighed local needs, regional competition and visitor patterns to reach recommendations.

CSL presented two primary options. Option 1 (the study’s recommended, community-leaning plan) would include four full-size basketball courts (convertible to eight volleyball courts), fitness and wellness spaces, an indoor walking track, an indoor play area, a climbing/bouldering wall as an optional amenity, a cafe-style food service area, parking for about 500 cars and a total site footprint of roughly 7 acres. CSL estimated a 65,000-square-foot building footprint and a 2025 preliminary total project cost near $39,000,000.

Option 2 would replace four permanent hardwood courts with a roughly 40,000-square-foot concrete “flat-floor” hall with retractable seating and stored hardwood courts and expand the building footprint to about 82,000 square feet. That alternative was estimated at about $53,500,000 and was modeled to generate higher nonlocal attendance (and more room nights) but at higher capital and operating cost.

CSL’s financial modeling showed operating deficits under conservative assumptions (no tenant revenue). The firm presented an estimated annual shortfall of about $432,000 for Option 1 and a larger operating gap for Option 2. CSL projected annual nonlocal visitor spending (economic impact) of roughly $5.8 million for Option 1 and about $7.0 million for Option 2, and estimated about 6,700 room nights annually for Option 1 versus about 8,200 room nights for Option 2.

The consultant emphasized both supporting and limiting factors. Support included a growing local population, active youth participation in indoor sports (notably basketball and volleyball) and a regional shortage of tournament-quality indoor facilities within a 90-mile radius. Limitations noted included rising construction costs (CSL cited an escalation from roughly $400 per square foot to about $707.50 over seven years), a lower local median household income relative to comparable markets, and only limited-to-moderate interest from nonlocal tournament organizers for a large, high-court-count fieldhouse.

Council members and staff focused questions on funding, the survey’s geography, and hotel capacity. Council member Savage asked about the survey’s respondent geography and the city’s ability to use property tax revenue, noting, “we do not have a property tax in the city” and expressing concern that many likely respondents live outside city limits. Bradley replied that ZIP-code-level response data exist and that the team would examine the inside-city vs. outside-city breakdown. On hotel capacity, the consultant said the current base of select-service hotels (many with 100+ rooms) should be sufficient for the recommended mid-size facility but would be inadequate to support a very large, 16-court regional fieldhouse.

Council member Savage also voiced support for the hybrid, multipurpose option, saying, “I like the hybrid option. It just lends more towards our population base, the usage. It’s more versatile.”

CSL presented possible funding approaches observed in comparable Arizona communities, including GO bonds, property tax–backed bonds and temporary sales-tax increases (the firm cited examples such as Marana’s temporary sales-tax approach). The report noted the project was funded in part by a grant used to support the feasibility work; Bradley said the city “was awarded, right around, $70,000 for this portion of the grant.”

Sites evaluated included the fairgrounds, Centennial Park and Kingman Crossing; CSL said each site was adequate but posed different constraints (Centennial Park more confining; Kingman Crossing better for longer-term expansion). The report also covered governance and operations models: municipal ownership with nonprofit operator or a public oversight board, and cautioned that tenant revenue (sports medicine, family entertainment) could help narrow operating gaps but should not be assumed in base-case financials.

No motion or formal council vote occurred. Council members asked staff to return with follow-up information; council discussion concluded with direction that the item be scheduled for another work session for more detailed analysis of funding options and survey geography.

The consultant’s written report and the slide deck will be available to council and staff for the next review, and staff will schedule the follow-up session to consider financing, governance and site questions.