Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks And Recreation Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parks staff propose fee increases and flag River Ridge Pool for potential closure or transfer
Summary
Parks and recreation staff recommended a set of department‑wide fee increases to meet cost‑recovery targets, proposed a pilot charging full nonresident cost for selected programs, and raised the possibility of removing the underused River Ridge Pool from city operation unless an alternate operator is found.
Parks and recreation staff on Tuesday presented a multi‑year cost‑recovery summary and recommended fee changes for fiscal 2026, and raised the River Ridge Pool as a candidate for divestment or alternate operation because of low use and high maintenance needs.
Robert Gaylor, parks and recreation manager, summarized a 2021–2024 cost‑recovery effort that led to a pyramid methodology: broadly used community assets (parks/open space) receive lower cost‑recovery targets while individual‑benefit services (lessons, personal training) are expected to recover a larger share of costs. He said department‑level cost recovery for the division has risen from about 31% in FY21 to about 36% in FY24 and recommended a mix of small fee increases and operational changes to continue progress toward adopted targets.
Proposed fee changes and pilot: staff proposed modest percentage increases by category (typical ranges highlighted in the presentation: tier 2 ≈ 3%, tier 3 ≈ 3%, tier 4 ≈ 12%, tier 5 ≈ 10%) and proposed a pilot to charge 100% nonresident cost‑recovery rates for three high‑demand programs — summer camps (Camp Goodwater), swim lessons and youth basketball — to test price sensitivity and resident access effects. Robert said the pilot would be accompanied by updated cost‑of‑service work and the department will bring a full cost‑recovery study in 2026.
River Ridge Pool: staff said River Ridge Pool is the lowest‑utilized outdoor pool in the city system and carries a relatively high net cost per admission. The city pays roughly $71,000 per year in direct operating expenses for the pool and anticipates up to about $200,000 in near‑term renovation needs. Robert said the pool was originally built and maintained as a neighborhood amenity that the city later accepted; staff suggested options: (1) identify a community or private operator to assume operations; (2) convert the site to a different park amenity; or (3) pursue other legal options if a land sale were proposed (staff noted parkland sales could require voter approval). He said staff would engage the neighborhood and return with a recommendation as part of the FY26 budget package.
Why it matters: parks and recreation services are partially subsidized by the general fund; increasing nonresident fees and improving cost recovery for specialized programs can reduce subsidies and align who pays with who benefits. Councilmembers expressed interest in getting more usage data (by ZIP code) and raw participation counts before deciding on pilots or structural changes. Councilmember Kevin said the city should prioritize residents' access to city facilities that are paid for by local taxes.
Next steps: staff will collect additional data (participant counts and ZIP‑code analysis for facilities such as Gary Park), run the full FY25 cost‑of‑service analysis, implement limited pilots if council directs, and include the recommended fee changes and River Ridge options in the July 8 draft budget for further deliberation.
Ending: councilmembers generally supported further analysis, with some endorsing pilot programs to realign nonresident cost recovery and others urging caution to avoid sudden capacity loss for residents.
