Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ymca Reopening topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears phased plan to reopen YMCA, paired with hill adventure-park ideas
Summary
Presenters proposed a one‑year "modified reopening" of the former YMCA with 40 weekly hours, a $500,000 one‑time rehabilitation estimate and annual operating costs; they also proposed phased, lower‑risk hill amenities and urged a Section 106 historic review before spending government funds.
Presenters briefed the Clarksburg City Council on a two‑part approach to reuse the city‑owned YMCA property: a one‑year "modified reopening" pilot to restore essential services for children and a longer‑term vision for complementary hill amenities. The pilot would operate roughly 40 hours a week (noon–8 p.m. Monday–Friday in the proposal) with a staffing model of three full‑time positions (manager, part‑time assistant and tech support) and maintenance support from parks staff.
Staff and consultants presented a vetted capital estimate of about $500,000 to get the building operational and described annual operating expenses developed through vetting with local gym operators and the former YMCA CEO. They reported an illustrative annual staffing contract of about $172,000 and additional recurring operating costs; presenters said those figures were based on local quotes and prior YMCA records, and recommended a phased approach to limit ongoing net obligations while the model is tested.
To bridge the capital need, presenters outlined several financing and partnership opportunities: a USDA Rural Development loan if the project is justified as a health initiative, a reported private donation of $200,000 routed through Healthy Harrison, and a membership‑driven strategy to pre-sell or incentivize take‑up. As an example, a proposed 500 student memberships—tied 1:1 to parent memberships—would aim to leverage the donation and drive total membership toward 1,000, reducing per‑member cost pressure.
Council members asked about revenue timing and sustainability. Presenters said memberships and facility rentals (swim team usage, leagues, parties) could provide recurring income but cautioned that some amenities—like splash pads—do not directly generate revenue. Councilors pressed on longer‑term options including day care and camps as revenue sources and urged cautious, incremental implementation.
On the hill above the YMCA, presenters discussed an "adventure‑park" concept after consulting industry experts. They warned that full‑scale zip‑line attractions and roller‑coaster variants carry substantial upfront, monthly maintenance and regulatory costs and may not be viable for a small city market. Instead they recommended a phased program: immediately commission a Section 106 historic‑preservation review (the presenters estimated approximately $10,000), build or improve mountain‑bike trails where grant funds already exist, consider a modest viewing tower, and explore re‑scoping a planned splash pad into an "adventure‑themed" splash feature. Presenters said these smaller investments could create early wins and help demonstrate demand before larger capital commitments.
Council reaction was broadly supportive of the phased approach. Several members urged staff to order the Section 106 review quickly and to return with more detailed cost estimates and options for a project manager or contract structure. The council did not take a final funding vote at the meeting; presenters recommended additional staff work, potential RFP language for facility management, and contract clauses (performance/escape clauses) to reduce city risk.
Next steps identified by council and staff include commissioning the Section 106 review, deeper cost validation for pool and building repairs, consideration of USDA loan eligibility, and discussion of whether to pursue a daycare or other revenue-producing program at the facility. A follow‑up work session and possible agenda item were suggested for the near term.
