Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Park Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parks committee divided over keeping or selling Colona Scott Family Park campground after financial review
Summary
Colona Parks Committee members traded sharply different views on whether to retain or sell the city-owned Scott Family Park campground after hearing financial figures showing modest operating revenue but large depreciation-related losses; members agreed to pursue grant and planning steps if they decide to keep it.
Chair opened a lengthy committee discussion over whether the city should recommend surplus (sell) Colona Scott Family Park’s campground or retain it and invest in improvements.
Resident Laura, speaking in public comment, urged officials to prioritize security cameras and a full-quality pickleball court but said she believes the city should sell the campground to a private resort operator. “I am one of the people that believes we should sell it,” Laura said, arguing the city lacks the capacity to run a resort and that 12 years of partial upkeep has left the facility underused and expensive to bring up to standard.
Committee members then reviewed detailed campground finances. A presenter summarized seasonal camper records showing 26 seasonal contracts from Colona-area residents and said pool-pass revenue was estimated at about $26,000; much of that is attributable to seasonal campers. The presenter gave an updated gross receipts figure of $482,000 but noted $80,000 of that was a one-time transfer for cabin repairs and “not true revenue,” concluding that the recurring revenue figure to consider was about $400,000. After removing one-time items, operating expenses were discussed in the transcript as roughly $394,000, leaving only a modest operating margin before depreciation. When depreciation was treated as a true expense, the presenter said the property showed an $81,000 loss; excluding building depreciation, it was a $48,000 loss.
Members discussed whether targeted changes could shift the economics. One presenter said adding more RV sites and marketing — “if you put in 31 more campsites, you’d stop having a conversation of how this part is paying for itself” — could close the gap between depreciation and revenue. Committee members also noted that some parts of the park (mini golf, courts, playgrounds and pool) function as general public park amenities that the city might continue to subsidize even if the campground were run as an enterprise.
No final decision was made to surplus the campground. The Chair said she would meet with public works staff (Ryan) to prepare a site list and estimates and to pursue grant options that could change the calculus. Members flagged a July public hearing and the need for a clear, time-bound plan if they choose to keep the campground.
Next steps: the Chair said she would contact public works to set up a site-walk and collect contractor estimates; committee members agreed to circulate lists of desired improvements to support that work.
