Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fees Membership topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Boulder Parks staff to revisit membership structure and fees as revenue gap widens
Summary
Parks staff told the advisory board they will propose membership- and fee-structure changes in 2026 after a market comparison and internal costing exercises; staff emphasized equity tools (financial aid, discounts) while noting a gap between average cost per entry and current recovery.
Staff presented the board with a review of the department’s fee policy and membership structure and said they will return with proposals this year to be implemented in 2026.
Stacy, a department staff member leading fee work, reminded the board that the fee policy approved in 2023 guides pricing and that the department’s approach intends to preserve equitable access through financial-aid programs and age-based discounts. “We are very committed to equitable access,” Stacy said.
Megan, recreation business staff, reported that current accounting shows an average cost per facility entry of about $14.11 and that the department’s existing recovery target (shown to the board as 67%) implies a recovery gap. Staff said roughly 55% of all entries are heavily discounted (for example, third-party insurer programs such as SilverSneakers), which shifts more cost to paying users. Megan said the department is analyzing revenue diversification opportunities at the recreation centers, the Boulder Reservoir and outdoor pools to reduce reliance on any single revenue stream.
What staff will return with: a) benchmarking and NRPA data comparing peer cities, b) membership-structure options (for example, premier passes that include all facilities or tiered passes), c) fee scenarios that meet revenue targets while preserving financial aid and community access, and d) a communication plan aligned with a new recreation management software rollout.
Policy and program trade-offs staff raised include: - Some low-cost-recovery programs are also mission-critical community services; staff said these require careful review before cutting because they meet equity goals. - Outdoor facilities (for example, Scott Carpenter Pool and Boulder Reservoir) have different business models and higher operating costs than indoor rec centers; staff said the department may propose different pass or access structures for those facilities. - Sponsorships and naming rights were discussed as alternative revenue sources; staff said a part-time marketing/sponsorship position had been considered to pursue philanthropic and sponsorship opportunities.
The board asked for benchmarking and historical data, and staff committed to provide NRPA benchmarking and a 10-year view of CIP and operating changes to help board members assess tradeoffs. Staff indicated any recommended fee structure will be modeled to ensure it meets revenue needs and will be paired with community engagement before final approval.
