Lawrence staff weighs membership fees to avoid deeper parks and recreation cuts

City of Lawrence Parks, Recreation and Culture leaders told the City Commission on July 15 that membership and spectator fees could reduce planned cuts to services if the commission directs staff to proceed, but they would not fully eliminate the department’s $1.8 million reduction target.

The report, delivered by Luis Ruiz, director of Parks, Recreation and Culture, said the department’s general-fund budget is “approximately $18,000,000” and that the city charged the department with finding a 10% reduction — about $1,800,000 — during this budget cycle. Ruiz presented two scenarios: one that relies largely on reductions and modest program fee increases and a second that pairs reductions with new membership and spectator fees.

The two scenarios differ in scale of service impacts and revenue estimates. Without new membership fees, staff projects roughly $1.4 million in departmental expenditure reductions and about $370,000 in additional revenue from modest program fee increases such as a $1 increase to aquatic admissions. With membership and spectator fees, staff estimated the additional revenues could be in the range of $500,000 to $750,000, which would reduce but not eliminate cuts and would leave fewer positions eliminated and smaller reductions in parks maintenance and recreation center hours.

Ruiz emphasized the purpose of the proposal in plain terms: “The purpose of initiating, or even presenting these, these fees is not for profit for the department — it's to try to maintain as many services as we can.” Assistant Director Lindsay Harder described the proposed fee structure and household options and said staff hopes to offer flexible access including day passes, punch cards and monthly or annual memberships: “we will be offering day passes and punch cards.” Harder outlined access guarantees included in the proposal: program participants who have already paid for a fitness class or league would not be charged again to enter, and parents attending practices would not be charged; tournament spectator fees at Sports Pavilion Lawrence (SPL) were proposed at $5 per person.

Staff described affordability measures in the proposal: a “qualified resident” or scholarship rate about 60% below the standard resident rate using low-barrier verification tied to existing programs (free/reduced school lunch, SNAP, housing assistance), a household membership covering up to five people, and free youth access windows (Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday 3–5 p.m., and Wednesday 1–5 p.m., proposed year round). Staff also reported the community engagement effort: a three-week online survey that received about 2,600 responses (roughly 1,300 included written comments), four pop-up events attended by about 52 people, and three focus groups. Staff’s conservative first-year membership target was 2,000 members and 500 punch-card day-pass sales.

Public commenters at the work session were divided. Several residents urged against fees, saying they would reduce access for children, seniors and low-income residents and questioned the facts in staff’s market comparison. Emma Dorst said, “I can say with total confidence that none of us are gonna be able to use the facilities anymore,” if fees are imposed at the proposed level. Other speakers, including former Parks staff and local users, urged the commission to accept some fees to avoid deeper service cuts and to preserve facility quality. Fred de Victor, a former parks and recreation director, praised staff work and said scholarships and fee waivers were an established mitigation.

Commission discussion focused on three core questions staff had asked the commission to answer: whether to continue pursuing membership and spectator fees; whether the proposed prices felt fair and transparent; and whether resident eligibility should be limited to city residents or include Douglas County. Commissioners expressed a range of views. Several commissioners signaled support for pursuing spectator fees and for exploring membership at a lower rate (an option staff noted would produce less revenue — staff ran an analysis showing an Option 2 that excluded SPL from the higher tier would reduce projected membership revenue by about $150,000). Some commissioners also urged that any fee policy include a robust, low-barrier qualification path for youth and low-income residents and asked staff to return with refined options.

No final action was taken; the item was presented as a work session and staff said they would return with revised proposals and implementation details. Ruiz and Harder said a membership launch would require internal systems work, staff training and an outreach campaign; they proposed a January 2 launch if the commission approved the structure this fall.

For now, staff and commissioners left the main outcomes as direction: continue developing membership and spectator-fee models, refine affordability and residency definitions (staff noted they have not been using address-based residency checks and would implement address/GIS checks if residency-based pricing is adopted), and return with more detailed implementation logistics and revenue projections before the final budget decision.

Ending: Ruiz asked for commission guidance over the coming weeks so staff could model 2026 budget numbers with either path; commissioners asked staff to bring back refined options and clarified they wanted continued community outreach and further analysis of possible alternative revenue (naming rights, sponsorships, parking permits, and other commercial opportunities) to reduce ongoing reliance on fees.