Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Facilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee tentatively backs phased fee increases for community use of public facilities, citing solvency and equity tradeoffs
Summary
Following a consultant fee study, staff proposed simplifying CUF permit categories into three and phasing fee increases (10% for categories A/B; 12.5% for C); the committee accepted the County Executive’s recommended first‑year increase with a commitment to monitor equity impacts and return in the fall with comparative jurisdictional data.
The Education and Culture Committee reviewed a CUF (Community Use of Public Facilities) fee‑study presentation and, after extended questioning, supported the County Executive’s proposed phased increases to restore enterprise fund solvency while asking CUF to monitor equity and market effects.
Presentation and rationale: CUF and OMB staff explained that permit fees had not been increased since 2009 and that a 2023–24 fee study recommended consolidating more than 11 user categories into three simplified categories and raising rates to rebuild reserves. Vanessa Lopez Cuevas, CUF financial administrator, said pre‑COVID revenues peaked near $12M but fell sharply and have been recovering; the Executive projects FY26 revenues of $13.2M and expenditures of $12.2M under the proposed changes.
Proposed changes and equity concerns: The executive recommends a 10% increase for categories A and B (MCPS childcare/nonprofit/government; nonprofits and county residents) and a 12.5% increase for category C (commercial and out‑of‑county users). Staff also recommended aligning field fees with Montgomery Parks and charging more to out‑of‑county commercial users to preserve in‑county access. Councilmembers warned that some changes — notably raising fields from $5 to $10 for A/B users — could be a 100% increase for community groups and leagues and urged CUF to consider shifting more of the burden to out‑of‑county commercial users or to phase increases carefully.
Operational matters: CUF staff highlighted embedded MCPS staff reimbursement arrangements and a long‑running reservation software problem. Staff said consolidation of rates simplifies contracts and improves the reservation platform's performance; they also proposed voluntary demographic queries in the scheduling platform to support equity outreach.
Committee decision and follow‑ups: The committee indicated support for the County Executive’s phased approach (10%/10%/12.5% over three years) for FY26 while asking CUF to return to the council with: a side‑by‑side comparison of neighboring jurisdictions’ fees, early monitoring data on who is using fields and whether out‑of‑county users shift away, and a fall check‑in on impacts (especially for smaller nonprofits and family users).
Ending: The committee’s tentative endorsement advances the Executive’s recommended first‑year increases to the full council; follow‑up evaluations and potential adjustments were requested to protect low‑income and community‑based users.
