Lakeland trustees discuss overhauling school facilities use policy amid complaints about fees and roster rules

The Lakeland Joint School District Board of Trustees spent its meeting reviewing proposed revisions to the district—ommunity use policy, focusing on how groups qualify for no-fee or reduced-fee access and how the district should bill for custodial, garbage and access services. Staff read the draft policy aloud and walked trustees through fee categories and administrative procedures.

The draft reiterates that school programs have priority and "use of school facilities requires the superintendent's approval," and specifies that some groups may be charged for custodial services, building opening/closing, field lighting and large-event garbage removal. "All facility use shall comply with state and local fire, health, safety, and police regulations," a staff reader said while reciting the proposed policy language. The draft also notes that students and school-related organizations shall be granted use of facilities at no cost, and that other organizations will pay fees and costs.

Board members and participants pressed staff on specific line items. Trustees flagged confusing wording that could force double charging for custodial services and asked that custodial charges instead be phrased as an "up to" amount tied to cleanup time. One trustee read aloud the numbers in the draft: "you would have to pay $55 an hour to use an elementary gym plus $50 an hour for custodial," and said the drafting must be clarified to avoid unintended totals. Staff responded that custodial charges are intended to reflect cleanup time after an event rather than an hourly rental multiplier and suggested changing the phrase to "up to $50" for custodial service where appropriate.

Trustees debated eligibility categories. The existing draft categorizes users into multiple tiers (government/MOU partners, school-related groups, chartered youth groups, youth athletic teams and fee-based users). Several speakers urged condensing categories to reduce ambiguity and administrative burden; staff proposed combining some no-fee categories while keeping governmental MOU partners as a top priority. The board discussed whether to consolidate to a single no-fee category with subgroups (for example, category 1a for MOU partners and 1b for other community groups) so priorities remain explicit.

A central point of contention was the "75%" in-district roster rule for youth athletic teams that qualifies a group for a lower fee category. Public commenters and trustees said the 75% threshold can be hard to apply and creates incentives to manipulate rosters. One participant noted club teams that carry the district name ("Lakeland Elite") but are not school-sponsored and asked how those teams should be classified. Staff suggested lowering the threshold (options discussed ranged from roughly 50% to 65%) to make administration simpler while still ensuring a majority of participants are district students.

Trustees also reviewed other practical items: tournaments were noted as specially charged category 3 events because of multi-day building use; keycard and key deposit procedures were clarified (proposed building access fee examples discussed included $15 for key cards and $50 for indoor door keys, with deposits held until return); and staff reiterated that all fees and any required deposits must be submitted before an application will be approved.

The board examined indemnity and damage-recovery language. The draft requires applicants to hold the district harmless for loss or damage arising from facility use and gives the district the right to have damage assessed and billed to the responsible group.

No formal vote was taken. Trustees asked staff to clean up ambiguous language, reword custodial fee sections to avoid double billing, consider lowering the in-district roster threshold or otherwise tighten verification procedures, and return with a revised draft. The meeting ended after the board agreed more precise wording and clearer category/subcategory definitions are needed before the policy is adopted.