Board discusses facility-use policy, potential carrier marketing agreement and repairs to administration building

Bay City ISD trustees heard a staff report and discussed options this month about how the district manages facility use, whether to charge outside youth organizations, and a nonbinding marketing agreement that could let a private firm market district property to wireless carriers.

Facility-use regulation and equity concerns: staff walked the board through the district’s facility-use regulation (cited in the discussion as GKG/GKP regulations) and the practical challenges of applying residency-based discounts for youth organizations. Administration told the board it is difficult to verify whether a youth organization’s participants all live in Bay City and that current practice can create perceived inequities when some groups are charged and others are not. The district flagged that heavy outside use of athletic fields and other facilities increases wear-and-tear and maintenance costs—staff gave the example that substantial work on a baseball field after storm damage cost about $20,000.

Options discussed included a uniform fee structure (everyone pays), a percentage-based discount for not-for-profit youth organizations (for example, 30–50% of the facility charge), or creation of a community committee that includes the city and youth organizations to assess real needs and coordinate use. Trustees suggested the district coordinate with the city’s parks and recreation staff and local youth organizations to determine true needs and avoid opening the facilities to use that would cost the district money.

Marketing district property to wireless carriers: staff reported on a potential nonbinding, five-year marketing agreement with Diamond Communications to market district properties to wireless carriers to increase local cell coverage. The administration described preliminary revenue scenarios: a small-location listing (press box or like site) could bring approximately $2,500 in the first year per carrier with a 2% annual increase; building or tower construction scenarios were presented as higher-yield options (roughly $9,000 per year in a tower scenario under the figures discussed), with potential revenue increasing as additional carriers sign on. Administration emphasized the agreement is nonbinding and the board would only be asked to approve any specific lease or tower proposal after a carrier expresses interest.

Facilities repair: separately, the board approved use of maintenance tax note funds to repair a leaking roof and a deteriorating wall at the HJ Collister Central Administration Building. Administration said it solicited two proposals for the work and recommended proceeding before further deterioration.

Next steps: district staff will follow up with community stakeholders (city officials and youth organizations) to study facility needs, propose a fair fee framework, and return to the board with recommendations. Any marketing agreement that leads to a lease or tower construction would come back to the board for approval of specific proposals.