Council discusses extending park tax to fund Lamont Park maintenance and waterpark upgrades

City staff briefed the council May 26 on a proposal to extend the dedicated tax that has financed Lamont Park and the Great Outdoors Waterpark. The bond-authorizing tax that funded the park’s 2014 improvements and debt service is scheduled to expire at the end of 2026; staff said a ballot question could ask voters to continue a similarly structured levy to fund both capital repairs and operations.

Presenters told council the park attracts about 35,000 visitors per season but is facing deferred maintenance: the lap pool is more than 50 years old and staff conservatively estimated replacement at roughly $2.8 million, possibly closer to $5 million when fully scoped. The playground (installed in 2006) and other site infrastructure also require attention. Staff noted the waterpark currently requires a general-fund subsidy; they proposed an extension capped by the 2014 measure at a maximum of $713,000 annually (the legal cap set by the earlier ballot language).

During discussion, council members probed whether the extension would raise household taxes. Staff explained the ballot structure would extend the authorization up to the prior dollar cap; the mill levy would be set each year so collections do not exceed the cap. Using 2025 valuation examples, staff estimated an average foregone tax impact near $36–$37 per year for a typical home if the levy were levied at the maximum; staff also noted that current collections were about $22 per year under the expiring levy in recent years. Council members debated whether packaging, timing and potential competing measures this year could affect voter support.

Council asked staff to consider affordability protections and options to avoid repeating frequent ballot measures: suggested alternatives included grant-seeking, targeted nonresident fees (staff said nonresident daily rates generate roughly 20% more revenue than resident fees), concessions/rental increases and potential partnerships to leverage conservation trust or grant funding. Several council members urged staff to develop a financial assistance program so low- and middle-income families can continue to access the waterpark if a ballot measure proceeds.

Staff said next steps would include more detailed financial analysis and draft ballot language to return to council; members noted typical scheduling constraints for placing measures on the ballot (certification for a fall ballot typically occurring in late summer). Council signaled general interest in exploring the extension but asked staff to return with more analysis and affordability options before making a final decision.