Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks And Recreation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Volunteer group asks Sunbury council to approve pavilion reservation policy with modest fees
Summary
A volunteer Sweeps Committee asked Sunbury City Council to adopt a pavilion reservation policy charging $60 for 3.5 hours (residents) and $80 for nonresidents, a $150 refundable deposit, and limited seasonal availability; council discussed logistics and agreed to let volunteers apply for grants to support facility upkeep.
A volunteer representative for the Sweeps Committee urged Sunbury City Council to adopt a formal reservation policy for the new park pavilion, proposing resident fees of $60 for a 3.5-hour slot and $120 for an eight-hour day, with nonresident rates of $80 and $160, respectively, plus a $150 refundable security deposit.
The representative said the group estimates roughly 75 reservations a year and projected about $4,000 in annual reservation fees that would help offset maintenance costs. "We wanted to keep these amounts extremely reasonable as the purpose of these fees is to help offset some of the costs of maintaining the park," the Sweeps Committee representative said (SEG 072–077, SEG 101–103). The group also requested the bathrooms remain locked unless the pavilion is reserved to reduce misuse and protect volunteers who maintain the site.
Council members discussed operational details, including who would unlock and lock the pavilion during weekday business hours and options for electronic locks in the future. The committee asked for city assistance from DPW or parks & rec during daytime hours and offered volunteer support evenings and weekends. The council agreed to let the committee pursue grant funding and to consider logistical options before finalizing a policy.
The council also approved a related motion to allow the committee to apply for external grants (SEG 373–396), and asked staff to follow up with guidance about signage, enforcement, and possible electronic lock installations. The council did not adopt a final, full ordinance at the meeting; staff were asked to return with details and costs for implementation.
