Franklin County weighs options for HAPO Center, including renegotiating interlocal agreement or selling parcels

Franklin County must choose how to govern, fund or possibly divest the HAPO Center and surrounding acreage, consultant Eric Johnson told the Franklin County Board of Commissioners on July 9. "It really is a generational decision," Johnson said, framing a range of options from renewing the existing interlocal agreement with the City of Pasco to selling some or all parcels.

Johnson reviewed property ownership, a history of capital funding and a set of alternatives for commissioners to consider: renew the current interlocal agreement, renegotiate the existing ILA to change governance and cost‑sharing, pursue alternative ownership or leasing arrangements, ask voters to decide on continued county support, or dispose of some or all county‑owned parcels. He recommended first clarifying title, deed restrictions and any grant or state‑funding obligations before proceeding.

Why this matters: the county owns about 70.67 acres that include the HAPO Center building, an ice arena, RV park and other parcels. The land and facilities have been supported historically through a mix of bonds, intergovernmental assistance and county operating subsidies; future capital needs and operating deficits raise questions about who should pay and whether the county should remain owner‑operator.

Key facts and figures Johnson presented: - County ownership: 70.67 acres (several parcels); a separate 31‑acre ground lease historically covered softball fields used by the City of Pasco. - HAPO Center parcel cited: ~27.57 acres (includes the arena, parking and related areas); parking lot ~5.89 acres; undeveloped parcels 4.10 and 2.11 acres. - Historical financing: voter‑approved bonds in the early 1990s; Johnson noted a 1992 bond authorization and that the interlocal agreement included $2,100,000 in debt‑service assistance associated with initial capital financing. - Naming/management: the county entered a 10‑year naming lease in 2019 at $100,000 per year to a private partner; day‑to‑day operations of some facilities have been contracted out in recent years. - Operating deficits: Johnson reported annual operating shortfalls in recent years generally split 50/50 with the city and typically in the range of $300,000–$400,000 total (county share roughly $160,000 in his example).

Commissioners and counsel stressed due diligence before any disposal or change in governance. County counsel cited Washington case law (Columbia Riverkeeper) and state rules governing executive‑session discussion of real‑estate minimum price, noting that factors affecting a property’s minimum acceptable price must be discussed in open session before the board may set a minimum price in executive session.

Commissioners directed staff and consultant Johnson to obtain an appraisal or market‑analysis estimate and to research deed restrictions and any grant conditions (including past state contributions and American Rescue Plan Act funds used for improvements) that could affect a sale or transfer. Several commissioners said they want public outreach and legal review before any major change.

Ending: No decision was made at the meeting. Johnson was asked to return with a scope and estimated cost for an appraisal or market analysis and to report on title, deed restrictions and any grant conditions that could affect disposition or sale.