The Summit County Council will likely hold a public hearing next month for residents to comment on the Snyderville Basin Special Recreation District’s proposed $150 million bond to fund new facilities in Jeremy Ranch and Silver Creek.
The 20-year bond would allow the district to build a climbing facility in Jeremy Ranch and an aquatic center in Silver Creek, but each building would also have weight and cardio machines like the Fieldhouse.
Basin Recreation Executive Director Robert Parrish told the County Council this week that the expansion is necessary as developments in the Snyderville Basin, like Altus Park City, come online over the next few years and increase the demand for services.
“We have development coming,” Parrish said. “In the next 10 years, we’re going to go from about 25,000 up to over 30,000 residents in the Basin. That’s a 20% increase.”
Parrish said the bond amount was determined based on feedback from residents about the project’s scope and desired amenities, plus creating a more connected experience for patrons.
“What it would create is an east, a west and a central zone in the district, with the intent and the hope that we would also have trail connectivity so that the residents that are on the west side of Pinebrook and Jeremy Ranch have trail features,” he said. “They could potentially walk or bike to the recreation facility and not have to come into (Kimball) Junction, not get on I-80.”
The bond would fund construction of the buildings, while impact fees, grants and public-private partnerships would pay for equipment and outdoor facilities.
“We’re not solely relying on tax dollars and property tax dollars to fund their recreation,” Parrish said. “We’re hoping as we go through this process that we will be able to identify cost savings and bring the cost down.”
Ryan Bruce, chair of Basin Recreation’s control board, told councilors the bond amount, how it would be distributed and other financial decisions are based on data collected through various surveys, audits and public engagement sessions.
“We’re reducing our fleet,” Bruce said. “We’re making sure it makes sense. We are taking control in understanding every bit of work that has to be done on every facility to plan for it and to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars.”
Parrish said he expects the construction’s total cost to be between $120 and $125 million, but the district is asking for $150 million as a safeguard for rising prices and unexpected roadblocks. He added that the district is also auditing its fee structure to raise more funding and modernize the membership structure.
“Right now, in looking at our cost recovery model based on similar recreation districts along with the national average, our fee recovery is actually less than what it should be,” Parrish said. “We’re probably at about 25% to 30% cost recovery. We do need to increase our fees, and our residents have actually mentioned that. A lot of them have said that we’re undercharging for a lot of the programs.”
County Councilor Chris Robinson expressed concerns about the long-term operations of the district, pointing out that the new buildings would double the square footage of Basin Recreation’s facilities.
“My recollection was that you sought a higher property tax increase for operations through Truth in Taxation, and we clipped your wings a little bit,” Robinson said. “That was just to manage what you’ve got now.”
Parrish said the district is already revising its strategic plan to account for the additional employees it will need to hire to run the facilities. Specifically, he said the increased fees should cover staffing costs and that a third-party company may be brought in to run operations.
“We’re going to start working in that direction now rather than wait for years until we’re ready to open and realize we don’t have enough,” Parrish said. “This will be planned for as we go through the process.”
County Council Vice Chair Roger Armstrong was also nervous about the ongoing operational cost of the new buildings. He told Parrish an aquatic center had been pitched to the County Council before, but councilors never felt comfortable following through with the idea.
“In the past, anytime when an aquatic facility has been mentioned, it’s been almost an immediate ‘not a chance’ because the (operations and maintenance) on aquatics is actually quite high,” he said. “It’s been on the list forever. It’s not an accident that it hasn’t been built before now.”
Robinson said he wanted to see a forecasted operations budget to prevent Basin Recreation from returning to the County Council to request a property tax increase after the facilities are built, but Parrish said it’s too early in the process to know those particular costs.
He estimated designing the facilities would take at least a year, followed by another year of construction, giving the district time to outline an operational budget within its means.
Robinson was also curious about Basin Recreation’s backup plan if the bond fails in November. Parrish said the district could save impact fees, but they likely wouldn’t cover the cost of the project because they need to be used within six years under state law.
Instead, the district would likely save impact fees and seek public-private partnerships, which Parrish warned could fundamentally change the nature of the projects because the district would be held accountable to a third-party investor.
The County Council did not take any action on the bond this week, but the county government plans to hold a public hearing on the proposal in the Snyderville Basin on Aug. 5.
Parrish said the County Council will need to pass a resolution authorizing the district to pursue the bond by Sept. 4 to place the measure on the Election Day ballot.
Information on the proposed bond and new facilities is available by visiting basinrecreationutah.gov/better-basin.