Commissioners split over size, location and equity of proposed regional athletic facility; staff says design will be scalable

Chatham County commissioners spent an extended portion of the meeting debating the scope, funding and equity implications of a proposed regional athletic facility that has been on the county’s SPLOST list.

Commissioners described a long history of planning for a large facility — including past market studies and cost estimates — that at one point was envisioned as a 12-court complex with a $60–$70 million estimate. Commission discussion focused on whether to scale the project back so construction could begin using the $17 million previously allocated under an earlier SPLOST or pursue a larger facility that would require additional funding. County staff said they are now looking at a scalable plan (4–6 courts initially) with the ability to expand later and that even a reduced facility will require more than the $17 million currently allocated.

Commissioner Patrick K. Farrell argued for maintaining the larger footprint, saying the facility would attract tournaments, generate visitor spending and provide long-term youth programming: "I think we should keep the size of this building as we had intended with a minimum of 12 basketball courts," he said. Supporters emphasized potential economic benefits from tournaments, year-round use for multiple indoor sports and proximity to bus lines and population centers.

Commissioner Dean Kicklighter and others pushed back on that framing from an equity perspective, arguing that large, centralized facilities are likely to be used more by middle- and upper-income families who can travel and pay for tournament fees and that smaller, neighborhood facilities placed throughout the county would better serve underprivileged children. Kicklighter said funding smaller community centers could put opportunities within walking or biking distance for children who lack transportation.

Commissioner Aaron Whiteley and others sought compromise: reduce the initial scale so construction can start before the next SPLOST vote but design the facility to be expandable. County staff described ongoing work to assemble a design team, produce a capital plan and provide commissioners with timelines. The manager said staff will supply a schedule and that commissioners should be involved in the design process and in outreach to stakeholders in the districts where facilities are planned.

Several commissioners asked that construction begin before the November SPLOST referendum so the commission can demonstrate progress to voters. Staff said a design team is being formed and that schedule details will be provided to the board.

The debate covered intended uses (multi-sport, emergency staging), operating costs, maintenance concerns and how the facility would fit within a broader county capital plan. Commissioners also requested written data on cost-share assumptions, including the share of SPLOST paid by residents versus visitors (a 60/40 figure was discussed and staff said they would provide the source of that number).