to the republic for it stands. One nation. >> All right. Roll call. >> Member Stick >> here. >> Member Gordon >> here. >> Chair Weiss. >> We have a quorum. >> Okay. Great.
All right. Uh, next thing on the agenda is approval of the agenda. I have a motion to approve. >> I move. >> Second. >> I move. >> So moved. Okay. >> All in favor? >> All in favor? >> I >> I thank you. >> Sorry. Thank you. >> And we don't have any audience comments
it looks like today. >> All right. And then uh I guess the the action item today is a fee study presentation recommendations. So with that, >> yes, thank you. Um today we have Christina from RA Rafelis with us and
she's going to go through our fee study as it stands right now. Um this is only for the uh recreation portion of the fees, the recreation and aquatics portion of the fees. The city is undergoing a full fee study which will include multiple departments including community development, but those will
not be discussed here today. This is just for the parks and recreation fees. So, um, I'd like to introduce Christina and she will go ahead and get started with our presentation. Uh, what we are really looking for today is just, uh, member input as the process stands right
now, not necessarily for the fee specific, but as the process stands and how we're going to be moving forward to completion with this project. So, go ahead, Christina. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you, Mandy. Um, as she said, my name is Christina Pinchilla
and, uh, I work for Rafelis. Um, and we have been hired by the city, um, to do a really thorough, uh, fee study, as Mandy mentioned, for all of the various fees, um, including parks and recreation. Um,
so, uh, it is great to present to you all today. I am happy to be here. Um, I wish I could be in St. Peach. [laughter] Um, but I am in Raleigh, North Carolina. So, and I work sort of all over the country. Lots of work in Florida, but we work really all over the country with
municipalities, um, and utilities on all sorts of various fees. Um, so that's sort of my role here. Um but the objective of this project has really been to rightsize you
all's fees based on the true cost of providing service. Um they're really um the methodology methodology of how your fees are where they are today is sort of unknown. That's one of the things we discovered um in through the course of
this project. So, we really wanted to uh have a specific methodology based on industry standards to really uh evaluate the fees. Um, and so I'm going to go through some of that today. Um, we obviously wanted to identify opportunities for additional revenue and
in some cases consolidation of fees. Um, because there are a lot of them. If you've seen [laughter] the fee schedule, um, it is quite uh, lengthy. So um you know in some cases it makes sense to consolidate fees and we'll talk a little bit about that and of [clears throat] course we always want
to work towards long-term sustainability for parks and rec operation and maintenance activities um and you [clears throat] know things like AC's breaking um happen. So we want to make sure that you know um that you all have the revenue available to to fix
those things when they happen. Um and then another big part and objective of this project was to benchmark um with neighboring peer communities. Um so we looked at 10 communities plus the for specifically for parks and wreck we looked at the Sunost YMCA's
um as a benchmark. Um [clears throat] that way you can kind of um you know it's not all about just making sure that you're covering getting cost recovery. you have competitors obviously and so if you're not staying within a range of your peer communities people will go
elsewhere to use parks and recck so that's an important part of this as well. So just to talk a little bit about your current fees and structure um for a few minutes um so right now for most fees
not all and we will talk about this a little bit later there is a distinction between uh in fees between residents and non-residents and that is very typical in most communities. Um you all obviously pay the local taxes in St. Beach residents do. So, we want to offer
because you're paying the bulk of the taxes um a discount for residents and have the non-residents that are coming in as guests to pay a little bit more. Um so, as part of this, we wanted to look at initially maintaining the existing ratio of resident versus non-resident fees to prioritize benefits
again for St. Pet St. Pete Beach taxpayers. Um and so we wanted to apply these adjustments consistently. Um and again documentation related to the initial establishment of these fees was not available. Um so we don't know what methodology was used originally.
[clears throat] So we really needed to connect in order to make sure we're covering the actual cost of service. We needed to find a way to connect the fees into expenses and revenues within the city's budget. Because
there's so many fees, we couldn't do that on an individual fee basis. So, the better way and the more efficient way to handle this is to really put each fee into a service category. Um, [clears throat] so we created seven
service areas for the parks and recreation fees and those are listed here. So each fee is connected into one of these service areas, fee categories.
Pool, recreation programs, the camp, gym, facility rentals, special events, and beach weddings. Then we worked with city staff mainly Mandy to sort of connect those two things those things together to connect
the budget expenditures and the revenues. So we used percentage of time um of department expenses to establish the cost to provide these services from the recreation department. That way we were able to take the total
revenue from the fees by each of one of those seven, right? We have seven categories. So the revenue for each of those categories divided by the expense for each of those categories. And that gave us a current cost recovery. And then once we had the current cost
recovery, we wanted to establish a target cost recovery. So that for this piece there are industry standards based on two different models. So we have the American Planning Association and the National Recreation and Park Association
models. They recommend it's called um a cost recovery pyramid and fees are tiered based upon the benefit of the service. So we have three tiers. Tier one offers the maximum
community benefit. Thinking of and we're going to go into more detail on which each of these look like. So, you know, just hang tight. I'm going to give you examples here in just a minute. Thinking parks, trails, open space. In these cases, we have a 0 to
20% cost recovery, meaning they're primarily taxfunded. We those that fall into tier two sort of offer a mixed benefit. And so we our target was a 70% cost recovery, meaning you're sharing the
cost. The person is paying a little bit and their taxes are paying a little bit. And then tier three are for individual benefit. You're thinking private lessons, private um
like a a private uh gym, you know, session, [laughter] facility rentals, rentals of the ballroom, things that, you know, uh adult leagues, adult basketball, things like that. Those have only really an individual benefit. Um so we are looking at 100% cost recovery for
those. Um and that because they're going to be fully userfunded. Okay. Okay. So, I'm going to go into those a little bit more because this is sort of the crux of the whole thing of how we're assigning fees. So, things in that tier one again have a high community benefit. You think about
things like playgrounds here. They're open to everyone. They offer great things for your community, open space, environmental quality, high quality of life. So, really, you don't want to charge fees for these things. St. Peach
doesn't currently charge fees for them and most places do not. So that aligns with the industry standard which is a 0 to 20% cost recovery. Is that everybody understanding that? >> Yes. >> Okay. Tier 2 is that sort of mixed
community benefit. Um so the industry standard cost recovery for this tier is in the 30 to 70% range. For the purposes of this study, we looked at 70%. So, examples of some of the fees, the parks and recre fees that we assigned to this tier are day passes, camps, afterchool
programs, pool fees, youth, uh, basketball or other sport leagues, your special events, breakfast with Santa. We want, you know, there there are um they are, you know, not open necessarily to everyone, but uh they are providing some
service that should be funded partially by tax funding. [clears throat] And then finally is that tier three that really just have an individual benefit. Um, so again we were looking at the industry standard here is between 70 to 100% but we were looking at 100% for
purposes of this study and this is your facility rentals, your ballrooms, park rentals, the patios, private trainers, fitness lessons and adult sport leagues. So those are really the three
uh tiers. We took current cost recovery. remember we calculated that at first and then we're going to shoot for a target. [clears throat] Of course, when you're going from sort of an unknown methodology and you're saying now I want to get to 100% cost recovery
that in some cases can cause a really large need for increase in fees. So in order to sort of mitigate the what we call the sticker shock, right? We don't want to go from a $1 fee to a $20 fee to use the gym. Okay, that's just an example. That's not necessarily what it
was. But we want to then look at, especially for those in the tier three that we're trying to reach 100% phasing in the increase over a three-year period. So, it's not just a you're getting to 100% cost recovery on
year one. That way, this the city can choose to sort of phase it in. Right now we have it default set to a three-year increase but certainly it could be fiveyear um it could you know even further than that um it is so that does have some built-in flexibility in our
financial model um and you know if you can you know allows for adjustments based upon the specific program obviously you know if a specific fee is is you know not going to be used if it's over a certain amount we wanted to have some flexibility in here so the purpose
of the phase in approach is to allow for that rate to get to full cost recovery over a certain number of years. And then again, I talked a little bit about the benchmarking. Um, but here are the communities that we benchmarked again and again with the YMCA as well.
Um so the purpose of benchmarking is to consider the rate adjustments we're looking at um within the broader context of other peer communities and make sure that you all can remain competitive again because we do want residents and non-residents to obviously use your park
and rec facilities and not go elsewhere. Um so we're making sure that our proposed rates are within the market range. So, we really want to see, okay, well, cost recovery, as an example, says that this rate should be $10,
but Largo is only charging seven, you know, do we really want to raise it? People aren't going to then come to our gym. They're going to go to the neighboring gym, you know, to save some dollars. So, we really wanted this as sort of a check against the cost
recovery, if that makes sense. Okay. So with that being said, we came up with a set of recommended fee options. So six options are available for each fee. Again, regardless of tier, we
provided the full cost recovery in year one. Okay. Then we looked at that phased in cost recovery. What would happen regardless of tier if we spread the increase over three years? Then we used our benchmark data to set
the rate at a max identified peer rate. So make it like this is your know uh Treasure Island is only charging $5. That's what we set in as a benchmark max. Then we set an override rate um to
allow for you know flexibility. Again it's a specific percent increase. Um I think you all know your community better than we do in many cases. So sometimes you just needed to have like okay this this cost recovery is too much or even
the benchmark seems too much. I don't think people are going to spend more than X dollars. So this is a way to sort of any way you can you can override the rate. Um and then the next one is just to keep the current rate if there you felt like there was no reason to change the existing fee. And then the final
option is to either consolidate or remove. Um there were some cases, as an example, um for a facility rental that's no longer being rented. Um so we really wanted to remove that out of the fee schedule. It's not currently being charged like it was when the fee
schedule was originally developed, so it makes sense to remove it. Um there's a lot of fees for like swim team lane rentals at various levels and costs, and we wanted to consolidate some of that. So that's what that option is for. >> [clears throat]
>> Um again the financial model does currently maintain the existing ratio of resident to non-resident. Um but in some cases as I mentioned there wasn't a difference. So the resident and the non-resident rate are the same. So these are just a few examples of
um instances where the resident and non-resident fees are the same. So, it's a lot of pool, swim with team rentals, fitness classes, and swim lessons, and a few other things. Um, but
one of the questions I think Mandy wanted to discuss today was, you know, does the board want to create a non-resident fee for these? So, a difference where non-residents would pay slightly more. Um, and then obviously we wanted some
input from you all on those cost allocation breakdowns. So those are sort of the two main things we wanted to talk about with you all today and hear from you about I think today with some final feedback maybe uh by next week if possible.
So I've talked a lot. I'm sure you all have questions. So I'm happy to answer any questions you might have. Thank you, Christina. Um, this is, you know, the point of this is to try to consolidate as many fees as we can. We do have a lot. It's an extensive list.
You'll see it here. There's some things that we no longer offer. There's some things that we no longer do, but if we can consolidate some, that would be great. Um, and then if we can reach, you know, um, you know, 100% cost recovery in especially like the tier three items,
that's kind of our goal. That's where we're heading with this direction. And it may not be an immediate one year 100% cost recovery. It could be a three-year 100%. We finally hit it in three years. And then we can look at fees, too, such as, you know, do we want to hit 100% as
in uh for the non-resident and then still subsidize resident fees. So, that's kind of everything's in place still at this point. We just want to make sure that you all are good so far with the methodology that we've been following to get to this point.
questions. >> I don't know. >> I guess first of all, it's good to have a methodology. >> We have a basic understanding path forward. Um I'm just curious what what did the benchmark show? I mean, how are we doing compared to our constituents out there
or competitors per se in the market? >> It really was variable by fee. Um, in some cases you are very competitive and and lower than your competitors. Um, and I definitely think there's some good room to raise your rates up a little bit
um to get additional revenue and still remain competitive. But then in some cases um you know uh you all were were higher but overall I would say majority of you all were lower than your competitors. And [clears throat] any correlation
between the higher fees and the amount of participation or rental or what have you? >> Does that make sense? >> It does. Like if we were charging more, would we have less participation? Is that >> or are we charging? So are we charging more now and as a result of that we're
not getting, you know, it's our percent of usage or what have you. It's not that high. >> Um Christina, when we were looking at the fees, would that have been included in that? I mean, it's kind of in what we had talked about for our um our cost
recovery. So, like those numbers were kind of, you know, factored in when we were going over and doing the percentage of cost recovery. So, I would say that right now we're probably in line with pretty much the cost recovery model that we're going with that it really wouldn't
have a direct correlation to it, but >> on each tier like >> Yeah. Is tier three are we higher than other people or tier one or tier two? >> Christina, do you know if we did by tier? >> I'm saying
>> I I I don't I don't have it by like I I can look I mean I can pull up the model and and take a look, but overall I think you all were below on most fees. You all are below regardless of tier. >> Okay. >> You are below most communities. Hey Christina, is there any uh any
visibility into the the success that those other communities are having as relates to the fees that they're charging i.e. % of participation and who will uh you know you don't >> it's hard for us to we can benchmark and
get their fee amounts like we can like you can get through ordinance and other things we could get their data about the fees that they're charging but we really didn't have a way to collect their like usage numbers >> kind of curious charging they're charging X and as a result of that they've got
>> they've got good participation right they've got uh >> residents n are using the uh using the service. Okay, >> Mandy, question for you. >> You uh book a lot of the reservations
for the classes and do you have a uh do you keep data and do you have a a general feel for what percentage of uh people using those services or non-residents? >> We do. Yes. >> Can you give me a ballpark? Is it 10%
90%. >> Um I would say it's it's um more non-resident than it is uh resident. I don't have the exact percentage off the top of my brain, but it would be more non-resident than resident for the class participation. Um special events when we do do special events, it's more
residents versus non-residents. And a lot of the special events that we charge for such as like the breakfast with Santa and things like that. Um, and then the pool usage, I would say, is probably a pretty good mix of of both resident, non-resident, probably more so equal
than uh the recreation classes, per se. >> Okay. When we uh when we include the um uh peer um services, uh some of the um
uh St. Petersburg is such a large city, it's not really a pier and yet um their pools are the closest pools to ours. >> So, it might be helpful to include at least those. Uh YMCA they're not really isn't one close by. Uh so, uh and that's
yeah, that that model is is way different, pretty expensive. So, but the other might want to include those uh those area pools. I think that when we did look at the Christina, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that when we did look at the
fees in the surrounding cities, the St. Petersburg pools were included. >> Um, do you know if that's >> off the top of your head? And then our next closest YMCA is that uh the large YMCA that is on uh 1st Avenue South or you know down in St. Pete. So I think that was in that was definitely looked
at. But >> yeah, and the YMCA was we were really using as a benchmark for summer camps. That was like the like the main >> okay >> uh use of YMCA was really because they have a very comparable uh summer camp program which is obviously a big thing
that St. Pete Budge Beach does as well. So uh I think very important. >> Are most of these non-residents local I mean local to St. Pete or where are they coming from? >> Yeah, they're local. I mean a lot of our non-residents are Treasure Island and uh South Pasadena. >> So I mean they're directly adjacent to
us. Yeah, they're defin Yeah. >> Yeah. Isla. We have some a lot of people from Isla and Tier Verie. So, >> and we're not overloading or excluding anybody by allowing them to come in. So, it's not it's no loss to us adding an extra person in.
>> No, not at all. >> Yeah. And um you know we had some caveats on the selection of the benchmarking remembering that they have to be for all the fees not just parks and wreck but they we wanted them to have had uh a
recent fee update within the last 5 years. So that was sort of another thing that really we were trying to get at was that they had also gone through a similar process so their fees weren't really outdated so that we felt like they could be comparable. Christina, can you
tell me what the or do you have a feel for cities around here and even around the nation that you've consulted for? Is is there a general rule for desire to collect 100% or to give
everything away free among the other cities that you've consulted for? Um yes. So I think everyone is attempting to find a balance. Um
because I think if you shoot too high in cost recovery at times it can really reduce your use usage and so therefore then you're really not getting any revenue. So, everybody is sort of looking to hit that balance, I think.
Um, where they do all want some additional revenue. Everybody needs revenue, I think, right now. Um, but keeping it within reason and with these checks. And I think that's what we're trying to do here, too, is making sure that it's, you know, we want to get as close to cost recovery where it is
reasonable to within reason so that you're still getting some use and revenue. Um so that's the purpose of the the many different options. Um we say it's you know we want in my world it's like I look at data I want to look at
numbers I want to have clear right percentage and methodology. I'm a utility finance person. That's my way. But in the in these cases with these fees, it's a little bit of science and data and a little bit of like we call it the magic where you're just having to like
use reason and and thought and you know uh it can't just be we're going to get to 100% and that's it. We have to have you know some type of uh limit and cap on that too. So, >> I mean, there's no way that we could ever [clears throat] charge, you know,
$20 per person per class for something just because we know that that's going to be the 100% cost recovery. So, it's got to be within reason. And that's why the benchmarking communities and and some of these other, you know, things have been considered when looking at what percentage we want to get to within
the the certain tiers because each tier is going to be different as well. We're not going to hit 100% in every tier, but if we can hit 100% in a non-resident rental capacity as opposed to, you know, a 30% cost recovery in a class, I mean,
that's that's doable. That's something that's a little bit more feasible than if we were to try to go 100% across the board. That's not going to ever happen. >> So So what from a next desk perspective, Christine and Manny, what do you all need from us? I mean, you got a couple items here. Um, but
>> Right. So I think it's by Mandy and and the city manager, city staff, we're really looking for buying on like the target cost allocation methodology that the tiers make sense to you that you're you're sort of agreeing with like what should be taxf funded versus sort of
individually funded. Um and in a similar way sort of do we want to keep the resident non-resident breakdown as it is? Do we want to make some adjustments to those? Um cuz like Mandy said, we could sort of keep it as it is. Um we
could add uh increase. Let me go back to that. Oh, it's wanting to go the wrong way. Um, we could add, you know, for these that are listed here, we could add a higher non-resident fee or even for the fees that are existing, you know, we
right now we have the ratio maintained, but we could certainly instead of increasing resident, we could just do an increase on the non-resident side and try and get more cost recovery from the non-residents. So, there are some options here. So, I think just your thoughts and opinions um on that part.
So, the targets and the non-resident resident fee breakdown. >> I I would be really uncomfortable bringing somebody here. And I mean, they're crying about a dollar over everything. So, if I'm asking somebody
from golfboard or that to come to a a class, it's like, well, mine's five and yours is six. >> I don't know. It just seems like really really really petty. I would like it very um amiable to my friends and family
um to participate in the things my hometown has to offer. That's that's how I feel very strongly about that. And years ago, I will tell you um that we did have a resident non-resident fee for classes. Um, and
just for that reason, just how you explained it, it it was difficult to entice people from the surrounding communities to come in and and participate in those classes. So, we did see some lower participation during those times. Now that we've streamlined it and we've gone to one fee for classes. Now, it doesn't need to be a
one fee for everything. It just one fee for classes. We've seen increased participation over the years. >> And also, what about like if I bring my family to the pool? Mhm. >> I mean, are they considered non-resident or are they considered
>> resident? >> See, at that point, yeah, that that could be a little mix of both because we do have a resident and a non-resident fee for at the pool. So, I mean, if you were to come in, you would be charged as the resident. The uh your family members may be charged as a non-resident, but right now, it's as a it's a nominal fee.
It's not a a huge increase. if we kept it as is, I want to say at some point we decided that um the fees for a non-resident were going to be, don't quote me on this, but about you know 20% higher than what a non than what a resident would pay. So um like I said
over the years we've done away with a lot of the non-resident fees that we felt that weren't working um in order to try to gain participation. So that's where we're at with this. This is mostly the pool access right here >> and classes >> and like fitness classes. Our fitness classes are all one rate.
>> The fitness class is pretty full. >> Yeah, I mean we do have a silver sneakers class that we run about 60 people per class. Mhm. >> Yeah. It's gone through some really um heavy participation >> and I do I have talked to people in golf
board or that want to bring their friends and have brought their friends, >> right? >> Especially women. >> Yeah. >> That they're we're the ones who pre mostly participate in these exercise classes. >> Yeah. I'd say we're probably 75% female in in some of these fitness classes that
we offer. But >> and one of the benefits of having more people is that you spread the cost of the instructor. >> Correct. >> And uh if you you know if you have 20% less people paying then we're we're essentially paying more. We're losing
money on the class. >> And we're not until we overload the uh classes. Having extra people come in is no big deal. If the pool becomes so crowded that you residents can't get in then >> Yeah, that's my my thing. But there's no danger of that. >> If if we're 110% of capacity and
residents can't get in because we got a lot of res issue. But if it's not then >> I think I like you know when you're working out silver stage whatever more energy is a good thing people there more participation on a weekly basis. A
lot of people show up I think. So if we were to get into a a situation, so in the past too, we've had issues with camp and camp would fill up immediately and it would be um what we've done in the past is we've done a resident priority
for for camp. So is that something that your recommendation would be so if we know that there's a program such as our camps, we do a resident priority registration and then a non-resident uh to fill in the gaps if we have a cuto off. So I mean camp we only take 100
people 100 kids in a summer. Uh for our afterchool program we take 75. Our afterchool program isn't really resident non-resident dependent because it's based off of the number of kids over at Gul beaches. That's where we pick up. So is that a recommendation that the board would like to move forward with as you
know go back to resident priority for those classes and activities that we know will fill out and hit max capacity? >> Yes. >> I mean it's St. Pet. You know, it's >> should be given the priority. >> Yep. >> Yeah, I agree.
>> It's unfortunate, but >> Well, no, it's not. It's ours. >> Well, it's unfortunate. There's not enough room for everybody. True. You got to prioritize and obviously prioritize. >> So, along those lines, I'd like to make a comment for Christina. I don't know how much um uh awareness
u you have about um is she still on? Yeah. >> Yeah. I don't know how much awareness you have about how things are funded and paid for in the penny for panelis program but our community center where these classes many of the uh classes are
held and our pool uh were paid for by the penny for panelis um 1% sales tax uh that was on uh countywide and basically I won't say we got it for free but um we got it Gulport didn't get a pool we have
one, I'm happy to share ours with them. And and then you also have to consider that um that uh we're not paying the amortization or paying down bonds or anything for that. So there's a huge
benefit. Uh and and that's so when you start charging non-residents for something, they essentially help pay for. >> Yeah. Well, it the construction of the pool. Is that what you're talking? >> Yes. The whole pool is free. It came from Penny for Benels, >> the entire community center. Not the
>> Well, not free to pay for it. >> Well, >> no, I I understand what you're saying. >> We didn't We're We didn't pay a separate tax for that. We chose to apply that money for recreation >> and that was a choice. We could have bought trucks with it.
>> Did the other communities choose to take that 1% and apply towards something else? >> Yes. That's exactly how it works. decision was cool. Yeah, I heard I heard that at one time it was um >> was contentuous, you know, there was a
lot of >> right >> just because we are a beach community and there's a pool >> right >> it's one of those things I remember I have heard discussions >> so when we look at when we look we're very fortunate so when we look at costs of operating the pool we're not paying
for the pool we're just operating it >> but the cost is very high >> it's extremely high pool is a loss is loss leader It's unbelievable. >> If you charge what it actually costs, it would probably be $20 per visit or more. >> It is really I I know.
>> But it's it's a gym. It's a u uh it's why people put pools in their backyard. They're very expensive. >> Beautiful. >> And I don't see when I've been there, I I the hours of operation and I just don't see it always being a money maker.
>> Oh, no. It's a money loser. It never makes money. >> Yeah. It's just >> But that's okay. None of them make money. >> Pools lose money nationwide. >> No. >> Right, Christina? >> In some cases, you're you're not you just reasonably you have to know in every case you're just not going to get to 100%. And that's okay because again,
it's providing such a wonderful community benefit. So, um, yeah, I think this, you know, it's again striking a balance. In some cases, not every program is going to >> is going to be, you know, a revenue maker. Yeah. >> And one question on setting fees. If if
we're going to lose a lot of money per visitor, if we lost more, would we get more visitors? We get more use out of it. Do you understand what I'm saying? If it were free, yeah, >> I'm not saying that making things free is is u ideal. I'm just saying that
that's a uh and that may be something you've run into in other places where they just say, "Let's make it free." Well, I think you could go about it a little bit differently. I think that instead of there seems to be just from my
little bit of knowledge, there seems to be like everything else like groups that kind of control >> Yes. >> the the the whole thing, you know, and shuffle. Yeah. Whether it's old ladies of menopause or kids or whatever, I
think it would be I think Since it's not a money maker and somebody really having that job, they can make it more amiable for all different groups. >> Sure. >> Yeah. Instead of the groups that seem to control >> this is
>> and like I said, I'm I'm not I hardly ever go there, >> but from what I've seen >> and and that's what Christina can offer to us. you've seen so much around the country and I would love to get um you know your feedback or thoughts on or
comparisons here. Here's how it works here where they don't charge or they charge a dollar to get use the pool or and here's what happens when they charge $10 to use the pool. We'd love to hear that. >> Yeah. And we have that built into the model. It Well, I can't say around the country, but I can say the 10
communities plus the YMCA that we looked at. So, yeah, we definitely did a local a local review. Um I would never say most places do not go free. That is very very rare. >> Yeah.
>> Um so am I hearing too more from the board that it uh do we prefer that benchmark rate kind of seeing what our surrounding cities are charging and get similar with what they're charging? I >> not across the board, but do you think
that that's, you know, in our model here when we're looking at the benchmark and looking at what these cities are charging, do we think that we want to get near that or do we want to kind of look at all of the other aspects to this such as the override rate which would be that specific increase for maximum
flexibility or is that more of how you're leaning towards? What are your thoughts on that? My thought is that um when I think of the city of Treasure Island, the city of Clearwater, city of Largo uh as peers, they all have
different objectives >> and um we should do our own thing. We should not target being in the median of what they're setting. I I think that uh if if uh we should look at other factors as more important such as
utilization and uh if uh we're trying to recover, you know, our fees and reduce our utilization by doing so, what have we accomplished? >> Uh and just to just to get in to to be
in the benchmark or the median with others, that would be my thought on that. >> Okay. >> Well said. I think one of the things the benchmark does because you know we're way too high and that's you know then we can start okay wait a second let's re-evaluate it but >> yeah so our priorities then are going to
be the resident priority for classes that fill classes or activities that fill um and then looking at utilization over some of these other um the fee options some of the other fee options utilization is like our priority we
don't want to lose the utilization of our fil our facilities our classes and all of that. Is that where we're going with this? >> You were saying residents for like the camps >> for the camp for the activities that fill >> for it to remain >> Yep. to remain open, but the activities
that fill, which would only be our child care programs really that that will fill and have a max based on licensing requirements. So that's why we max. >> I agree with that. If that's what you're asking. >> Yes. >> And that really is the magic of it. you know, we, you know,
>> you look at all the numbers and benchmark and all of that and it's really, you know, you really h you have to weigh a lot of different factors and that's why there's so many options here for the recommendations [laughter] because, you know, yeah, like okay, I mean we if we you know, Rav tell us, you've been hired to come in and get us
max revenue and if that, you know, we could certainly give you that number, but then if no one's using the class, then you're getting zero revenue, right? So, there does have to be a really good balance among these various options. And the last thing I'll say is it's important to note that there isn't going to be a benchmark for every single fee
because some things are like Aquathon class, you know what I mean? Like not every community has a comparable benchmark, but I think for the bigger things there are um like the rentals, camps, um things like that. So, you know, the bigger ticket items I
think um gym rentals, all of that type of thing. Classes, a lot some of the classes uh have comparable benchmarks. So, >> okay. >> Great presentation. >> Oh, thank you.
>> All right. So, I think that you know what we're going to do is we're going to still continue to work with Christina to finalize our fee recommendations and then it'll be brought to commission for approval when we take the entire fee study to commission. Um I believe Christina, do we have a date? Maybe end
of February. Are we thinking for that? It's going to be early March. >> Okay. Early March. >> March. >> So, >> yeah. So, we're need to wrap up these models. That's why we requested feedback sort of by the end of next week. We need to wrap up these models by sort of early next month so that we can start um putting together the presentation and
things. So, great. So, staff will continue to work with Christina to finalize the fees. Um they'll be brought to commission and added into our ordinance. And then at that point, we'll be moving forward with our new fees and see how everything works out. So um your input really has you know provided us a
good guideline to you know this resident priority anything that fills and then um you know really keeping in mind utilization of the facility and and not you know losing any of that. So there any final thoughts on the fee study? >> I said one question on the facility
rentals and such. How are we doing on utilization on that? I mean I think it was it was down after obviously co and all that. We've been down for a couple of years now because of we've had some facility maintenance issues too. We've been down with AC for um so really we can't even look at the last two years because of the storms and then we had AC
issues the year prior to that. But um before that we're we're bouncing back right now. We're kind of back to what we were about three years ago um in our facility rentals and I want to say we average about 25 to 30
um rentals in a year. We were doing more. We were booking at one point Friday, Saturday, Sunday at the community center, but down to one building. We're still very limited on what we can do with our child care program. So, we're booking right now Saturdays. I think uh this month might
have been a little light, but starting again in March, we're booking every Saturday. April, I believe, is booked every Saturday. So, we've got a few solid months coming up of at the community center of of rentals. And then the Warren Webster is picking up. We're we're working on a full marketing campaign to try to increase rentals
>> at the marketing because that those are big hits. If we get 2700 >> dollars for a rental, I mean that offsets a lot of the cost associated with it does. Yeah, it does. >> Marketing is huge because if people don't know about it, they're not going to where else would you want to get, you
know, everybody in that beautiful face. >> Oh, yeah. I mean, it's beautiful. The the room, the facility sells itself, but I mean, we need to help it along a little bit with some marketing. So, we're we are working towards that. I find it just um my son like 15 years ago got married in Clearwater um
recreational center and it was like $700. >> I mean and it was so beautiful. It's you know right right around the Palm Pavilion up there and it's gorgeous. But it was only $700 and then we were just
>> got a deal. >> That's a bargain. That's a bargain. a lot of demand assuming back then too. >> Well, I don't know. They were so amiable like their staff and everything like like if it was 8 to 4 or I don't know the the hours it was like oh we don't
care if your your family stays longer, you know, we'll come back and help you all clean up. >> It was kind of like that, you know, but that was 15 years ago. People >> Yeah. >> behave differently. >> Yeah, we were probably like that about 15 years ago as well. So, [laughter]
>> yeah, it was it was it was um loosey goosey back then, but yeah. So, we're just tightening up a little bit. >> All right. You got anything else ready to journ? >> No, I want to talk about something else. >> Why are you laughing? We We can't talk
outside of here. >> Yes. Well, this meeting was specifically for our feast study. So, is it something that pertains to our feast study? >> It's not. >> Okay. Do we want to touch base after the meeting? >> We can't. >> Okay. >> We're not allowed to talk to each other.
[laughter] >> Christina, Christina, you can. Thank you, Christina. >> Thank you very much. It was fantastic. >> You're so welcome. I hope you all have a wonderful week. >> Talk to you later, meeting. >> Thanks. >> We've only taken 45 minutes. Do you mind staying another five minutes? >> Yeah.
>> Okay. Um, shuffle board. Mhm. >> The meeting that you put together and held at the uh Warren Webster was spectacular. >> Oh, thank you. >> That was um Mandy put together a meeting uh when she and Camden and uh
>> Laura, right? They had a um a great uh presentation and uh question and answer um and u it was terrific and attracted um a huge group. I say huge I mean that
40 people or 50 people is a huge group. >> Uh including the shuffleboard people. >> I didn't know they existed. >> I've been looking for them for a year. >> Okay. And >> how do you find them, by the way? >> Do you have a meeting? [laughter]
>> Yeah, they're they're more seasonal. Um, so right now they're you'll see them every Tuesday morning. They're they're Tuesday right now from 10. Well, really from about 10 until 2, I want to say, at the shuffle boards. Um, and they're a great group, but they are pretty seasonal, but they're there uh January through April
>> consistently on Tuesdays. >> So, the discussion that I I wanted to have is um that the shuffle board and the shuffleboard building um which is a whole another story. But the shuffleboard uh courts and the
shuffleboard building is like its own little island. It's nothing that we've ever talked about. It doesn't show up in budgets. It doesn't show up in work orders. It doesn't show up. And if you look on our website, it doesn't exist
the city's website. Uh if you you do shuffle board and you get nothing. Uh they have a private Facebook group. You have to be invited to join. I've asked to get on it. I met the shuffleboard people. And uh they uh they actually
uh they maintain the uh the shuffleboard court. You call them courts, lanes, courts. They maintain the shuffleboard courts themselves. They have machinery to wax it. The actual shuffleboard courts are in horrible condition. Uh they they need a probably an $8,000
>> closer to 20. >> It's period. How much? >> 20. Probably closer to 2020. >> I'm terrible with inflation. >> But >> you can't put hardwoods in your your house for $10,000. >> No. Yeah. >> Actually, I'm I'm getting to the point where you just need to add a zero at the end to a lot of the things that I the
numbers I come up with. But [laughter] but uh Yeah. So, and and it it just so it's just there. And here's this $20,000 potential cost to be used by 20 people. Uh the building itself is a
historical building which was damaged in the hurricane. And the reason it was damaged was because this group voluntarily in using their own materials added walls to an open air pavilion. And it was the wall one of the walls that
they added that was um uh pushed in by the storm surge. So, our city engineers and people uh decided the building uh the needs to be uh uh
>> well, initially they said we'll put it out for bids to fix it. And the bids came in way too high. >> Correct. >> And there were like 20 or 30 biders or or people showed up to look at it. And I thought, well, is there a mechanism where we could just
take our hammers and go out and fix it ourselves? And I think the answer is no. >> Correct. >> So, we're going to demolish a historical building. That pavilion was brought over from on a barge because there were no bridges in 1920. Was brought over on a
barge from Gulfport. It's a historical building. We're going to demolish it and we're going to build a new building. We have plenty of money to do it. Uh we have um I think that money is is completely paid for by insurance. So
there's plenty of money to do it. But I I listen to these things and I think this is crazy. Uh and and I think it exists in a uh in a closet or a hole somewhere in the city where no one actually has their finger on. I'm not saying that you should or or should not,
>> but it's amazing to me that things like that can exist. An entire substructure people using our facility exist and we know virtually nothing about it and have virtually no control over it. And so I I
I mention this because uh the the good news is I finally met him. But the bad news is we're the parks and rec advisory committee and we don't know anything about a major facility in our city. >> So I bring that up not necessarily with recommendations or call to action, but
something that I'd like for us to be thinking about and that's not may not be the only thing that we're not really >> involved in >> involved in and aware of. And Mandy's uh she used to be parks and wreck and so
this whole thing everything was in her purview and and now just wreck. So >> yeah for for myself yes but our board is still parks and recreation. So, I mean, we do have other facilities. You know, think about our park pavilions. Um, you know, things that we would like input on
our park pavilions, our um, you know, maybe even, you know, the Mary Pier, you know, anything that would be considered recreational, I think would uh, you know, fall under our purview to kind of be more aware about. Um, you're right, the shuffleboard building has gone like
kind of under the radar for a lot of years. uh it would be something that we definitely moving forward would want to involve you all with and the maintenance and the upkeep of the shuffleboard courts because they do that's a great group and they don't ask for a lot. They have been doing a lot of the maintenance
over the years on their own. Um but it is like you said still a city facility and it's a still you know a part of our recreation activity. So anything that we can do to try to kind of help the shovelboard people and you know it's not just this club that uses it. We do have,
you know, they have a specific closet dedicated to residents that want to go out there and use it at any time. There are people that go into that park, especially uh people that live in, uh, Pasigril have gone over there and used it. The women's club have gone over and used that facility. So, definitely it's
not outside of our purview to go ahead and review every now and then. >> Did they accept you on Facebook? >> I haven't I haven't gotten the invite yet. I'll have to push to get it, but at least I got contact information, so it's a start. It
>> is a start. >> Um, our dog park >> our dog beach rather, which is not official. >> Uh, is is any of that uh public or official or
>> it once we remove the current signage and we put up the new signage, then it will be considered off leash. So that dog beach that we have down at the end of First Avenue, um we've decided that this is not an actual parcel of land. This is kind of more of like a sandbar.
It comes and goes depending on dredging and and storms. So what we are doing is we're no longer considering that a public park. It's going to be just an open parcel of of land that like I said, it could be there, it could not be there. So any of the regulations that we
have as far as the parks and dogs on leash will kind of go away. So we do have we're working on new signage to be put out there that'll designate that dogs off leash. >> Use it your own rest. >> Now you're up to date. >> Thank you. >> Thanks for staying an extra five minutes
and thank and thank you. >> You're welcome. >> All right. Motion >> motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> I