Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ice Arena topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission tables $45,000 ice-arena feasibility study, asks administration to tighten scope and timeline
Summary
After consultants outlined benchmarking options for the Mount Clemens Ice Arena, commissioners raised concerns about the $45,000 price, operator involvement, deed restrictions and study duration; the commission voted to table the agreement and asked administration to revise scope and timeline.
The Mount Clemens City Commission on June 3 tabled a proposed feasibility study with Plante Moran RealPoint to analyze options for the Mount Clemens Ice Arena, directing city administration to revise the agreement’s scope and timeline.
Administration said the ice arena faces ongoing deficits driven by bond payments and a needed parking-lot replacement, and recommended engaging Plante Moran RealPoint to assess operations, potential conversions, redevelopment options and opportunities to capture new revenue streams. Plante Moran representatives described prior arena work and said a benchmarking exercise could identify best practices and alternative revenue sources.
Several commissioners questioned the study’s $45,000 cost and whether the arena operator had been adequately consulted. One commissioner noted a deed restriction on part of the arena property that limits use to recreational purposes and urged more collaboration with the arena’s management before spending the funds. Commissioners also asked that the contract include a firm delivery deadline; consultants said they commonly leave a one-year window in contracts but expected to complete the work in about 90 days if information is available.
Motion and direction: Following discussion, a commissioner amended the motion on the floor to table the agreement and ask administration to return with a revised scope and timeline. The amendment was supported and carried by roll-call vote.
Why it matters: The arena has been subsidized in past years and faces long-term bond obligations plus capital needs such as a parking-lot replacement. Commissioners framed the issue as a financial decision that may require evaluating all city recreation facilities together to identify efficiencies and avoid duplicative operating costs.
Next steps: City administration will revise the study agreement to clarify scope, stakeholder engagement and a firm timeline, and will return the revised contract for commission consideration.
