Double-Standard Leases At City Facilities

Tweet

During Monday’s Janesville city council meeting, the council sounded as if they were willing to scrooge Janesville Youth Baseball out of the batting cage lease at the Jackson Street location. After being presented with three different contract scenarios by the city administration, council members scrutinized the options with the non-profit community organization (JYB is a non-stock, non-profit, apolitical organization) and seemed bothered that the batting cage facility still might cost the city a few thousand dollars to operate in 2009.

JG Excerpt:
The council - delayed renewing a lease with Janesville Youth Baseball to operate Swinger's batting cages. The council wants staff to come back with a lease that makes sure the city doesn't lose money on the deal. In 2008, the city covered a loss of $2,929.

This directive (not to lose money on the deal) came just a few weeks after the council literally gave away primary use and control of another city-owned facility to a for-profit private investment junior hockey venture. With the hockey group, city taxpayers still expect to cover a loss of at least $65,000 a year at the ice arena facility. And unlike the WHP, revenue collected by the JYB helps with expenses at the Janesville Sports Complex instead of padding profits. In addition, the baseball group has accepted equipment maintenance and utility bill obligations of the batting cage facility.

The city collections at the batting cage facility provided in the lease (no revenue sharing from admissions) are still short in my view, but it doesn't even compare to the disgraceful city give-away to the for-profit WHP. Yet the batting cages are a much needed public participant sporting activity for Janesville youth.

The Janesville city council’s double-standard towards the primary groups representing each facility should sicken the average taxpayer and raise suspicions on whether the city council received a quid pro quo from the politically connected hockey group. Their attitude towards the non-profit youth community group just doesn't add up.

Adding more fuel to the fire is a new report showing the $200,000 in ice arena improvements may actually cost closer to $350,000. What will the fickle city council do now?

The obvious question: Why is a city facility leased by a controlling user group expected to break even, if the primary user is non-profit? Yet it is acceptable to operate at a loss if the primary user is for-profit.

The city council decision on the batting cage lease has been postponed to the next meeting in two weeks.
Note: This posting is the independent perspective and opinion of its author, and does not imply an affiliation to any of the individuals or organizations mentioned.