Reston Association review of fee 'pyramid' flags underperforming programs; staff to recommend changes at Sept. 25 budget meeting

Reston Association staff presented a first-year review of a "benefits fee pyramid" — the framework the association uses to categorize non‑assessment fees — and told the board the report identifies programs that are not meeting revenue or participation expectations and may need fee changes or other adjustments.

The presenter said non‑assessment fees account for roughly 20% of the association’s revenue but that the report covered only a subset of that revenue and did not fully allocate expenses to specific fee lines this year. Staff said they were not yet comfortable presenting net‑revenue (revenue minus attributable costs) for every line because expenses are spread across multiple budget lines; staff told the board they are working to tie costs to program revenues for the 2026 fee list and would present a draft fee schedule on Sept. 25.

Examples the presenter and directors discussed: - Nonmember recreation passes: revenue remained near target after a fee increase but participation fell; staff suggested exploring a seasonal tennis‑only pass when pools are closed. - Camp programs: some base day camps performed well while specialty "adventure" camps underperformed; staff proposed program tweaks. - Walker Nature Center: fees may be a participation barrier; staff said they may consider lowering some fees to increase usage, but cautioned camp activity at the center drives much of its summer revenue. - Stand‑up paddle boards and boat rentals: several directors said these activities have not consistently met revenue targets and asked staff to quantify net costs so the board can decide whether to change, reduce, or discontinue programs.

Director Jescher asked for net‑revenue figures (including staffing costs) so the board can make budget decisions consistent with the value framework the board adopted last year. The presenter said staff will include expense allocations in next steps and that the board should expect specific recommendations at the Sept. 25 budget meeting; some directors signaled they may bring motions on specific program changes at that meeting.

Why it matters: The fee review is intended to make non‑assessment activities more financially sustainable and aligned with the association’s stated value tiers. Staff recommended further analysis and indicated several tangible follow‑up items for the next budget work session.

What’s next: Staff will provide a draft 2026 fee list and include expense allocations where possible. The board will consider recommendations and potential motions at its Sept. 25 meeting.