Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks And Recreation Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate panel limits how much local governments can charge kids to use public fields
Summary
SB420 would cap municipal fees for youth players under 18 at $25 per month or $10 for up to three consecutive play days; proponents called the bill an equity measure and opponents said user fees fund park maintenance and would be harmed.
The Senate Local Government Committee approved SB420 on Feb. 28 after debate about municipal user fees and contract protections. The measure would prohibit a local government from charging a youth under 18 more than $25 per month or $10 for three consecutive play days to use a sports field; swimming pools and ice rinks are excluded.
Senator Ellie Baldwin and sponsor Ellie Boldman described the bill as an equity measure to prevent municipalities from pricing children out of participation in local sports. Baldwin told the committee fees have risen steeply and cited Aspen Institute research describing dramatic increases in youth‑sports costs; she gave the example that some local fall soccer seasons had become prohibitively expensive for families.
Jennifer Olsen of the Montana League of Cities and Towns testified in opposition, saying local parks rely on user fees to cover repair and maintenance and that those fees were set to ensure equitable access for organizations that use fields repeatedly. She warned that limiting fees could shift maintenance costs to property taxpayers and complicate existing contracts.
The sponsor offered a friendly amendment, not to retroactively void existing contracts: the amendment exempted contracts established prior to 07/01/2025 from the new fee caps. Committee discussion touched on bond financing, existing contracts, and whether cities already subsidize fields through property‑tax levies. After amendment, the committee passed SB420 on a roll call (10 yes, 1 no). Senator Baldwin said she supported adopting a ‘reasonable‑contract’ protection and indicated willingness to consider a short-term contracts carve‑out on the floor if members preferred.
The committee recorded the passage and the measure will advance to the next stage of the legislative process.
