Rec center sparking heated debate

Rec center sparking heated debate

November 1, 2001

By Janelle Holden
Journal Staff Writer

Delta has one. Durango has one. And, for the second time in seven years, Cortez residents will vote on whether to build one.

Building a proposed city recreation center promises to be one of the most contentious issues on the 2001 ballot. As of Wednesday morning, the Cortez Journal had received dozens of letters to the editor about the question, and signs supporting Ballot Measure 2A have recently been stolen from some residents’ yards.

"I think people have a tendency to feel that this is a done deal, this election. And I don’t believe it is. I think it’s going to be a close election," predicted Bob Diederich, chairman of Friends of the Center, the group lobbying for the recreation center.

Supporters argue the proposed .055 percent sales-tax increase is a small amount to ask for a new 43,000-square-foot recreation facility. They say the 55 cents extra consumers would pay on $100 worth of groceries would help build the health of the entire county.

The center, managed by Cortez Parks and Recreation, would be located at Parque de Vida, north of the skate park, and include a handicapped-accessible indoor jogging track, family pool, water slide, water channel for resistance walking, six-lane lap pool and diving board, basketball and volleyball courts, multi-purpose rooms, an exercise area for aerobic machines, day care, and office space.

The center could also include racquetball courts if the state gives the city a $500,000 Energy Impact Assistance grant it applied for. If the measure fails, the city loses the grant.

According to the results of a city survey this summer, residents support the $8.9 million bond measure by 69 percent. Cortez Parks and Recreation Director Chris Burkett said of the 1,349 surveys mailed to residents, 243 were returned, and 168 of those were in support of putting the measure to a vote.

However, a city survey conducted just 10 days before a 1994 vote on a similar proposal predicted it would pass by 70 percent, and it failed by a 2-1 margin.

This leaves some hope for the measure’s opponents, who say the tax is too much of a burden for those on a fixed or low income, and argue they shouldn’t be forced to pay for a luxury they wouldn’t use.

The bond issue would raise the combined city, county, and state sales tax in the city to 7.4 percent from its current 6.85 percent. Of the 7.4 percent sales tax, the city’s share will rise to 4.05 percent.

Although opponents worry that once the sales tax is in place it will never retire, city officials point out that the bond and sales tax legally must retire in 20 years or less.

"It’s not Income Tax 1913," explained City Manager Hal Shepherd. "It’s got to sunset."

Built into the bond is an extra $300,000-a-year subsidy as a cushion to help run the center, but the city only expects to use $115,000 of it a year. The extra money will go into a fund to help subsidize the center after the bond retires.

No subsidies are expected to come out of the city’s general-fund budget for 30 years, Shepherd estimated.

The center is expected to cost $581,906 a year, generating an estimated $412,250 in revenues from user fees.

The proposed fees to use the center are the same for both residents and non-residents. On a daily basis, infants would be admitted free, children from the ages of 5 to 12 would pay $2 for admittance, youths would pay $2.50, adults $4, seniors 60 and older would pay $3, and a family of five would pay $9. Annual passes for five-member families would be $450, for seniors $175, adults $250, youths $150, and children $125. Twenty-visit punch cards would also be available based on the same fee schedule.

Burkett said there would be three new full-time employees and an estimated 20 part-time employees to help run the center. The existing parks and recreation staff will move to the building to help keep the overhead costs down. The center would be open from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m.

As at the existing outdoor pool, times for all types of groups — families, youths, and seniors — would be scheduled.

Between interest, sales of the bonds, and the expected subsidy, the entire financing for the center would total over $15 million.

The Friends of the Center said they raised $6,000 for campaign efforts. If the measure passes, extra money will be transferred into a scholarship fund for low-income residents who want to use the center but can’t afford it. They also plan to pursue other grants and donations to help fund the center and scholarships.

No one denies the facility will be running at a loss, but Burkett said it’s impossible to break even or make a profit without raising the fees so high no one could afford them.

"City government wants to get as much return on the dollar as possible, but they realize they want to make the facility as usable and available for everyone as possible.

"Our existing swimming pool, it’s only about 56 percent self-sufficient. If we wanted it to pay for itself we wouldn’t have it.

"Most rec centers in the state run anywhere from 60 to 85 percent self-sufficient," said Burkett.

John Gomez and Kathy Peterson, opponents of the measure, say the city would be better off covering the city’s existing outdoor pool, and not getting in the business of competing with already established gyms in the city.

"We can’t depend on people moving in here to pay our taxes," said Gomez, who acknowledges there is a need for an indoor pool, but not a full-blown recreation center.

Burkett said the city council did consider covering the outdoor pool several years ago, but the expense of a $600,000 roof, winterizing the building, and maintaining a 50-meter pool was prohibitive.

All of these arguments are familiar to Rick Garrick, the town of Delta’s recreation superintendent. Delta, a town of 6,000, passed a 1 percent sales-tax increase in 1991 to build a 52,000-square-foot recreation center.

"If we went to vote again today for the same thing, I don’t think there would be one person who would vote against it," said Garrick. "It may not ever make a lot of money, and it may be subsidized forever, but you can’t even measure what it does for our community."

Both Garrick and Dean Palmquist, the executive director of Montrose Recreation District and former director of the Wray recreation center, said that out of all of the groups who use recreation centers, senior citizens get the most benefit.

Palmquist said that a walking program he started for senior citizens in Wray produced dramatic results. "I saw people going from being on bottled oxygen to going off the bottled oxygen," he said.

But the biggest benefit of having a recreation center, said Palmquist, is bringing people together to socialize.

"It was kind of a coming together, a meeting place for the community."

Supporters of the recreation center hope that will happen in Cortez, and warn that if the measure doesn’t pass this time it will come up again.

"If it’s not voted in now and we wait again, it’s just going to cost so much more in the future," warned supporter Helen Gonzalez. "I don’t think it’s a done deal if it doesn’t pass this time."