Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rec Center Feasibility topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultants say stakeholders support vision for Orange rec center but want clearer finances; board told 'levy first'
Summary
In Bloom Consulting reported broad stakeholder enthusiasm for a consolidated Orange recreation center and tested a campaign goal of $22'$26 million, but interviewees and trustees urged more detail on taxpayer impact, fundraising feasibility and a "levy first" approach before any bond or public campaign.
In Bloom Consulting presented the results of a stakeholder feasibility study on Jan. 27, telling the Orange City School District Board that local supporters generally liked the vision for a consolidated recreation and community center but wanted more detail on costs and taxpayer impact before committing to a public campaign. The consultants said they tested a campaign goal between $22 million and $26 million and proposed a phased timeline that could extend toward 2029'2030.
Kate Newsome, one of the In Bloom presenters, told the board that while the study did not run a formal bond-passage test, "all interviewees did express support for a bond issue within the survey items that we administered." She and fellow presenter Megan Branson emphasized that stakeholder interviews (22 one-hour conversations drawn from 33 invitees) produced a positive initial response but flagged the need for clearer projections on operating and maintenance costs, a detailed donor case and explicit information about the tax impact for voters.
Trustees pressed the consultants on sample composition and political risks. A trustee urged broader outreach beyond regular program participants, asking for interviews with residents who "don't participate in OCE at all" to understand barriers to engagement. Several trustees also stressed that any capital campaign must be sequenced after the district secures its operating levy: "Levy first," one board member said repeatedly during the discussion.
In Bloom recommended next steps including revising the case for support with more persuasive financial detail, identifying targeted campaign leadership, undertaking levy and bond feasibility work, and expanding stakeholder outreach to include nonparticipants and municipal leaders. The consultants noted advantages to consolidating aging facilities, potential partnerships with health-care organizations and opportunities to relieve campus traffic with site modifications, but they cautioned that political complexity across five municipalities and current uncertainty in philanthropic markets would require careful messaging.
The board did not take a vote to commit to fundraising or to a bond; the presentation was framed as an early-stage feasibility assessment and the consultants urged follow-up research before any formal campaign launch.
