Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks And Recreation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County staff propose parks and rec fee increases to cover rising costs
Summary
Parks and arts director Duncan Chisholm proposed raising several facility rental rates, shifting some hourly rates to day rates, and adding service fees for staff/time. Commissioners asked for modeled revenue impacts and asked staff to return with forecasts before formal adoption.
Get email alerts on the Parks And Recreation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Duncan Chisholm, Lake County’s parks and arts director, presented a conservative package of proposed fee updates intended to address rising operational, maintenance and utility costs across county recreation facilities. Chisholm said many fees have been stagnant for years and proposed moving some hourly charges to daily rates, increasing a community gym rate from $6/hour to $25/hour, raising field and pavilion rental fees, and adding service charges for staffing, field prep and floor covering when required.
Commissioners questioned specifics: how the proposed nonprofit rates would cover event staffing and cleanup at the rodeo grounds; whether parking and special‑event fees were set too low for for‑profit users; and how many users currently know how to rent county assets. Chisholm said the department will return with a short financial model showing likely annual revenue under the new schedule and examples of typical users (e.g., youth leagues, birthday parties, tournaments). He emphasized an incremental implementation timeline and suggested a July 1 effective date to align with the fiscal year.
Discussion also covered marketing and access: commissioners urged the department to create clearer rental procedures and consider modest marketing to attract out‑of‑area events that could use facilities during low‑demand periods. Several commissioners supported modest increases but asked for data on past bookings and projected revenue before approving ordinances. Chisholm agreed to provide recent usage and revenue history and to propose a one‑year review after implementation.
No formal action was taken; commissioners generally supported staff returning with detailed usage and revenue projections so the board can consider adoption at a future meeting.

