Beschreibung

Prior to its opening the community was assured by the mayor that its anticipated revenues from user fees would be adequate to meet operating expenses.

No data were presented to justify the mayor’s promise and, of course, the mayor’s office has never presented a report on actual Indoor Recreation Facility revenues compared to operating expenses.

The facility has been operating for two (2) years now. So just how well has the facility performed from a revenue perspective and how much credence did the mayor’s promise have?

The following tabular summary presents revenues budgeted by the mayor’s office – under whose aegis the facility operates - and actual revenues received.

The facility was open for six (6) months in 2010, July through December. Thus the City’s 2010 Operating and Revenue budgets reflect anticipate income and costs for half the year.

Year Revenue Budgeted* Actual Revenue Received* Shortfall

2010 $87,800 $19,203 - $67,797

2011 $166,500 $92,095 - $73,405

TOTALS $254.300 $111,298 - $141,202

* Source: Saratoga Springs Finance Department Records

So through the first 18 months of operation – July 2010 through December 2011 – the facility generated a revenue shortfall of $141,202. Of course even to realize revenue collected required the facility to be operated in a manner that frequently limits its availability to the general public.

And the first quarter of 2012 is no better. In fact, the City’s posted 2012 1st. Quarter Revenue Report shows only $18,084 in “Indoor Rec. Facility Rent” collected in the first three (3) months of 2012. Additionally, Johnson realizing that the facility would not generate revenues adequate to meet operating costs quietly reduced the revenue budget from $166,500 in 2011 to $123,266 in 2012.

Even the lower budgeted amount, however, appears to be unobtainable. Based on proportionality the facility would only realize $72,336 for the 2012 budget year. But even these lower than budgeted revenues are only realized by outsourcing the facility to AAU weekend tournaments in the spring and fall. These tournaments effectively close the facility to the citizens and taxpayers of this community (whose property taxes serve the facility long term debt) while resulting in traffic and off street parking that disrupt the adjacent residential neighborhood.

Keep in mind that the Indoor Rec. Facility revenue was, according to the administration, to be adequate to offset operational expenses. Clearly the administration has failed to meet that promise. Time for the other members of the City Council to step in.