10/22/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The community's representation in the management of the community center has fallen under the City Council's general oversight, but assisting the City Council in representing the community's interest has been the Community Center Task force, a committee made up of city residents with a large component of Parks and Recreation Commission members. After the April, 1997 advisory election, this arrangement worked to review options with architects and city staff for preferred options for design of the building keeping as close as possible to plans put forward for the election. The first priority was to design and construct space to accommodate the Children's Home Society, a nonprofit child day care and related family services organization that committed to an annual lease in the building. This first phase of construction was completed in September of 1997 and turned over to the Children's Home society for their operations. The second phase of construction required a great deal of additional deliberation by the City Council and the task force. Recognizing a commitment to stay as close as possible to the understanding with the community at the time of the election, the Council and task force faced inevitable choices of whether or not to spend a little more to make some aspect of the facility better in the long run. Choices such as a wooden gym floor, better heating and air conditioning control, better furniture, a more attractive brick facing, additional storage space and movable partition walls in the old dance floor area were decided on as important enough to do despite the added cost. Construction began last spring with enough work getting completed to allow a second tenant, the school district's Community Education department to lease and occupy space starting this past September. The gym, office space, old dance floor, lounge and meeting areas and outdoor improvements are the final improvements being made. Building Operations It was recognized early that the facility would have to generate revenues to help pay for its operation costs. With the construction being paid for by existing tax increment funds, no debt would exist for the city on the building. How to pay for utilities, personnel and maintenance is a common concern for cities with community centers. The two tenants mentioned helped address that concern with lease agreements generating over $85,000 a year. Renting the rest of the space was figured to be another way of generating revenue. While operational budgets were estimated and re -estimated, it began to become clearer this past spring that operational costs would exceed previous expectations and expenses would have to be looked at. Two things contribute to this reexamination of operations. First, the community center should put funds aside to pay for future maintenance and replacement costs, like new carpeting, roof repairs, etc. Second, some aspects of the facility would require more annual maintenance than was originally anticipated. Looking to develop a conservative operating budget that could accommodate these kinds of costs, staffing options had to be looked at more closely. Early in the planning for the community center discussion of staffing identified a possible cost savings where existing city parks and recreation management personnel would staff the facility rather than hiring a separate director and staff. As the operating budget estimates began