Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Recreation Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Richmond council keeps recreation fees unchanged after cost-of-service review; consultant warns of declining cost recovery
Summary
After a consultant presentation and community engagement review, the Richmond City Council voted unanimously to keep recreation fees unchanged for fiscal year 2025–26. The study found aquatics programs generate most recreation revenue but overall cost recovery has fallen and staff flagged options for modest revenue increases in future years.
Get email alerts on the Recreation Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Richmond City Council voted unanimously on May 20 to keep recreation fees at current levels for fiscal year 2025–26 after receiving a cost‑of‑service analysis and community engagement summary from consultant Barry Dunn.
City staff and consultants presented a multi‑year review that examined operating revenues and expenses for recreation facilities and programs, including community centers, general recreation, aquatics and the convention center. Jesse Moyett of Barry Dunn told the council the analysis covered fiscal years 2022–2028 (projections partly modeled) and showed a downward trajectory in cost‑recovery percentages, driven largely by payroll and benefit increases and some non‑personnel costs. "When we add some additional expenditures, mainly that is in that administrative bucket... it naturally pushes things down," Moyett said during the presentation.
The report said aquatics account for roughly half of annual recreation revenue; aquatics cost recovery was comparatively strong (near 40–50 percent in the consultant's analysis), while community centers and general recreation recover a much smaller share of total costs. The staff recommendation, endorsed unanimously by the council, was to leave recreation fees unchanged for FY25–26 and to continue annual reviews of fee schedules while pursuing non‑fee revenue and engagement strategies.
Deputy City Manager LaShonda White and Recreation Deputy Director Rajna Maharaj presented additional context. Maharaj told the council the city has adopted fee‑waiver and partnership policies and has issued fee waivers to nonprofits totaling $12,797 in FY23–24 and $8,866.50 so far in FY24–25. Council members asked for more detail on utilization by facility, a plan to increase lifeguard recruitment to expand pool hours and a clearer breakdown of parks revenue versus maintenance costs (maintenance sits in Public Works' budget).
Councilmember questions also touched auditorium repairs. Public Works Director Daniel Chavarria said an earlier assessment estimated roughly $8–9 million (several years ago) for substantial auditorium repairs and that a more comprehensive facilities needs assessment is under way.
The council voted 7–0 to accept the staff recommendation to keep recreation fees unchanged for the coming fiscal year and asked staff to return with more granular usage and maintenance metrics and a training and implementation timeline for fee‑waiver and partnership policies.
Ending: The consultant estimated the city would need to generate approximately $175,000–$200,000 in additional annual revenue by fiscal 2028 to move cost recovery materially higher under a mid‑range scenario; council members directed staff to develop follow‑up metrics and to pursue grant opportunities to support programming.

