City considers raising rental fees for park properties

Sandusky city commissioners are poised to increase rental fees at Sandusky's parks and gazebos.
Andy Ouriel
Feb 25, 2013



The new daily rate structure shows prices escalating anywhere from $10 to $20, each time a facility is rented out for a picnic or family outing.
Anyone can support or criticize the proposed measure at the 5 p.m. meeting at City Hall, 222 Meigs St. The seven commissioners plan to vote on the issue, which needs majority support before a new rate structure is adopted for this season.
Sandusky resident Tim Schwanger, who advocates for the preservation of area shorelines and waterfront features, said he worries the money won't be funneled into parks and recreation programs as promised.
Read more about the proposed rate hike in today's Register or e-paper.


The Answer Person

Sounds good to me! You wanna play you gotta pay!

Licorice Schtick

Sure. THAT will balance the budget.


If lowering taxes creates jobs, would not lowering fees create more usage? :):):)

Truth or Fiction

The problem deals with useage not fees. You can charge all you want but if no one comes it's a moot point.


My spelling of usage is correct and, When using moot one should be sure that the context makes clear which sense is meant.

T. A. Schwanger

There wouldn't be an issue with the rental fee increase if the added funds went to hire personnel to maintain the facilities. As written, the added dollars will be placed into the general fund to be spent as pleased.

I personally ran into two instances last year where people renting the facility spent more time cleaning prior to than setting up for their party. Trash from the previous party, goose/bird droppings and uncleaned restrooms

Truth or Fiction

forgive my fat fingers and thank you for the grammar lesson. The point remains the same. Increasing fees has no effect unless the parks are used.


The parks would be used more often if they didn't look so unkept. No one wants to party in an unkept park that no one is maintaining. It becomes a bad reflection on the city for visitors to come in to town only to see unkept parks.


where did the funds go before? Were they not always placed in the general fund or did they go to the parks specifically? If they went to the general fund before, why is raising the price an issue now? If it went to parks/recreation why is it being changed when adding an increase?

T. A. Schwanger

@ Wired:

Here's what the attchments for the Ordinance to approve the fee increases states:

""""Any amounts generated annually by said fees, rates and charges of shelter and gazebo rentals will become part of the general fund and shall be used to defray the cost of any improvements directly related to the
shelters and gazebos"""".

Placing the added funds into the General Fund does not ensure the money will be used to improve or maintain the shelters unless personnel is added to do such. Currently, there are issues with preparing the shelters for rental based on shortage in staff.

The City has a Greenhouse Endowment, Washington Park Endowment and a Cemetery General Maintenance Endowment. When the Marina District Project at Batter Park failed, it was suggested the City create and place the $50,000 project deposit into an endowment fund for the Sandusky Bay Pavilion. The money was spent elswhere.