(Feb. 9, 2017) Can a child in Ocean Pines walk into the community center gym and play basketball, if that area is unoccupied, without paying for the privilege to do so? Currently, the answer is no.
On Monday the board of directors discussed the use of the community center and its gym and – in a broader sense – the policies for usage of association amenities.
Directors Dave Stevens and Cheryl Jacobs were upset to find out that a child would have to pay a drop-in fee at the gym, even during off hours, which triggered talks on whether amenities should be run to serve homeowners or to turn a profit – or whether there was some gray area.
“Neighborhood kids can’t take a basketball in and shoot hoops if it’s open?” Jacobs asked. “That’s ridiculous. What do we have a gym for?”
Director Doug Parks noted that Resolution M-02 included some basic guidelines.
A subsection on “Overall Amenity Goals and Objectives” states, “All Association amenities shall be operated in a business-like manner. Fee-based amenities and those providing food and beverage products and services shall be budgeted separately. These amenities should be managed to cover, at a minimum, operating costs through fees and operating revenues.”
Jacobs said association members paid dues, in part, for the right to use Ocean Pines amenities.
Stevens agreed.
“General assessment ought to cover some of those charges,” Stevens said. “We built that building for the community … whether or not they come over and use the building or not they still have to bear some of the responsibilities. Operational costs go with the building.”
Stevens also disagreed with statements by Assistant Treasurer Gene Ringsdorf, who said Ocean Pines needed to maximize profits and minimize its losses across all amenities.
“For every dollar of revenue you get in that’s a profit you’re reducing assessments for all 8,452 property owners,” Ringsdorf said. “To the extent that you can maximize a profit because you can, then I say do it because you’re benefiting everyone else.”
Stevens argued that many in Ocean Pines lived on limited incomes, while others benefited from having large discretionary income.
“When you run into the stopping point of only the people with the large discretionary income can take advantage of [Ocean Pines amenities] … then we’ve gotten away from, I believe, who we are,” Stevens said.
Ringsdorf said the concept of maximizing profits was “what will the market bear.”
“If our market has lower-income people, you take that in consideration,” he said. “I’ve heard a lot of people discuss our amenities over the last few years, talking about let’s try to break even. That’s not the goal. Why have amenities then if you just want to break even?”
While he conceded recreation and parks had never exactly been a profit center, there should at least a goal of improving operations, Ringsdorf said.
“Historically, we’re getting about $0.35 of revenue for every $1 of expense we charge,” he said of the department. “For fee-based amenities … we should try to maximize the profits or minimize the losses. And the break-even concept is, in my opinion, not a valid concept.”
Interim General Manager Brett Hill said about $61 of the annual assessments in Ocean Pines supported programs of the recreation and parks department, including activities at the community center. The building includes a large gym and at least three meeting spaces available to community groups. Monthly board of directors meetings and work sessions are held in the Assateague Room in that building, for instance.
Recreation and parks use the gym for both organized team sports and regular drop-in periods. Other community groups can also schedule activities in the gym.
But, that can occasionally be difficult to balance. Hill said pickleball, for instance, accounts for less than one percent of the membership of Ocean Pines, but occupies more than 20 percent of the available time in the gym.
Pickleball members pay a $150 annual fee to use facilities in both the community center and the Manklin Sports Complex.
“You’re talking about the poor people … they’re carrying a burden of subsidizing an amenity and the amenity membership is an extremely small fraction of the community,” Hill said. “That gym could be utilized for other programs that are generating revenue, or that membership base needs to be paying for the use of the facility to compensate for the lack of revenue elsewhere.”
Stevens said there was certainly a question of fairness, with some groups paying a small amount on an annual basis for a large percentage of facility usage, while others have to pay a cost per-use.
“I think the community center is there for the community,” Jacobs said. “That’s why we built it. That’s why we have that facility. Of course we want to try to cover our expenses, but … we are a nonprofit, and so we’re not obligated to make money. But, it would be great if we would cover our expenses.”
She added that more data on usage of the facility was likely needed, including the fee structure of various activities there, as well as fees paid by homeowners and residents, versus those paid by nonresidents.
On Monday the board of directors discussed the use of the community center and its gym and – in a broader sense – the policies for usage of association amenities.
Directors Dave Stevens and Cheryl Jacobs were upset to find out that a child would have to pay a drop-in fee at the gym, even during off hours, which triggered talks on whether amenities should be run to serve homeowners or to turn a profit – or whether there was some gray area.
“Neighborhood kids can’t take a basketball in and shoot hoops if it’s open?” Jacobs asked. “That’s ridiculous. What do we have a gym for?”
Director Doug Parks noted that Resolution M-02 included some basic guidelines.
A subsection on “Overall Amenity Goals and Objectives” states, “All Association amenities shall be operated in a business-like manner. Fee-based amenities and those providing food and beverage products and services shall be budgeted separately. These amenities should be managed to cover, at a minimum, operating costs through fees and operating revenues.”
Jacobs said association members paid dues, in part, for the right to use Ocean Pines amenities.
Stevens agreed.
“General assessment ought to cover some of those charges,” Stevens said. “We built that building for the community … whether or not they come over and use the building or not they still have to bear some of the responsibilities. Operational costs go with the building.”
Stevens also disagreed with statements by Assistant Treasurer Gene Ringsdorf, who said Ocean Pines needed to maximize profits and minimize its losses across all amenities.
“For every dollar of revenue you get in that’s a profit you’re reducing assessments for all 8,452 property owners,” Ringsdorf said. “To the extent that you can maximize a profit because you can, then I say do it because you’re benefiting everyone else.”
Stevens argued that many in Ocean Pines lived on limited incomes, while others benefited from having large discretionary income.
“When you run into the stopping point of only the people with the large discretionary income can take advantage of [Ocean Pines amenities] … then we’ve gotten away from, I believe, who we are,” Stevens said.
Ringsdorf said the concept of maximizing profits was “what will the market bear.”
“If our market has lower-income people, you take that in consideration,” he said. “I’ve heard a lot of people discuss our amenities over the last few years, talking about let’s try to break even. That’s not the goal. Why have amenities then if you just want to break even?”
While he conceded recreation and parks had never exactly been a profit center, there should at least a goal of improving operations, Ringsdorf said.
“Historically, we’re getting about $0.35 of revenue for every $1 of expense we charge,” he said of the department. “For fee-based amenities … we should try to maximize the profits or minimize the losses. And the break-even concept is, in my opinion, not a valid concept.”
Interim General Manager Brett Hill said about $61 of the annual assessments in Ocean Pines supported programs of the recreation and parks department, including activities at the community center. The building includes a large gym and at least three meeting spaces available to community groups. Monthly board of directors meetings and work sessions are held in the Assateague Room in that building, for instance.
Recreation and parks use the gym for both organized team sports and regular drop-in periods. Other community groups can also schedule activities in the gym.
But, that can occasionally be difficult to balance. Hill said pickleball, for instance, accounts for less than one percent of the membership of Ocean Pines, but occupies more than 20 percent of the available time in the gym.
Pickleball members pay a $150 annual fee to use facilities in both the community center and the Manklin Sports Complex.
“You’re talking about the poor people … they’re carrying a burden of subsidizing an amenity and the amenity membership is an extremely small fraction of the community,” Hill said. “That gym could be utilized for other programs that are generating revenue, or that membership base needs to be paying for the use of the facility to compensate for the lack of revenue elsewhere.”
Stevens said there was certainly a question of fairness, with some groups paying a small amount on an annual basis for a large percentage of facility usage, while others have to pay a cost per-use.
“I think the community center is there for the community,” Jacobs said. “That’s why we built it. That’s why we have that facility. Of course we want to try to cover our expenses, but … we are a nonprofit, and so we’re not obligated to make money. But, it would be great if we would cover our expenses.”
She added that more data on usage of the facility was likely needed, including the fee structure of various activities there, as well as fees paid by homeowners and residents, versus those paid by nonresidents.