Letter to the Editor

As members of the subcommittee of the Parks and Recreation advisory board that developed the resolution seeking to renegotiate the terms of the Lions Club's lease with the City of San Marcos for its tube rental in City Park, we'd like to respond to recent criticism by Lance Winter ("Parks Board Threatens Lions' Share," San Marcos Daily Record, Feb. 14, 2021). Winter writes, "The Lions Club tube rental has been something forged over many years where today it runs like a well-oiled machine. And because of that dedication, and years of hard work, it has become a fantastic generator of funds for the Lions. Funds the club uses philanthropically throughout the city." He claims that in seeking to renegotiate the lease we are threatening to take away the Lions Club's funding for critical nonprofits, like the Hays-Caldwell Women's Center. We disagree. Moreover, we think Winter does not adequately represent our position on the respective merits of lease renegotiation and the Lions Club's charitable contributions. 

First, let us be clear that our concerns are independent of the question of how much support for the Lions Club’s charitable donations is provided by the tube rental, and of the value of such donations. We acknowledge that the Lions Club contributes to many worthy organizations, and it's not our intention to call their service record, benevolence, or reputation into question. Nor is it to undermine their philanthropic efforts. We are simply driven by interests in protecting the city's river and riverfront parks, enhancing the opportunities of all citizens to enjoy them, and increasing revenue for the Parks department in a way that's fair to all stakeholders, in particular taxpaying citizens. 

Second, we do not claim that a renegotiated lease agreement is the only practicable approach to addressing these concerns. After all, the issue of what is in the best interest of the city and what would bring about the best outcome for all stakeholders is a complex one, and there are many empirical questions for which we don't yet have clear answers. (How would reducing the number of days of operation of the Lions Club tube rental impact the river? How much would revenue for the Parks and Recreation Department increase if a $2 surcharge per tube rental were implemented? (etc.) While we think that the changes we recommend will have a positive outcome for the City of San Marcos and that the costs they would impose on the Lions Club are not unreasonable or unsustainable, we do acknowledge that there is some uncertainty about the precise effects of the changes we propose. But we emphasize that despite such uncertainty we are confident that these changes would provide significant benefits for our Parks department and that they would have an overall positive impact on our parks. And even if it should turn out that there are unforeseen negative consequences of such changes, we won't be ashamed (as Winter says we ought to be), because we think that the values guiding our decision to recommend to council such a renegotiation are ones that should guide any parks board, and moreover, that the specific considerations that have led to our decision are strong. Most of these have already been stated (see "Tubing Talks Float to City Council,’’ San Marcos Daily Record, March 1, 2021), though they bear repeating: 

(1) Under the current lease agreement, the rental fee for the LC facility falls well below market value. Raising the rent to market value would help provide much needed revenue to a parks department that has long struggled under funding shortfalls. And — as long as the tube rental continues to be lucrative — it's unlikely that this would have a severe impact on Lions Club’s charitable contributions. 

(2) Limiting the number of days during which Lions Club can operate its tube rental would open up the river to a range of other recreational activities. As many citizens of San Marcos know, the river tends to become very congested on the days when tubers are out. Those who have experienced the river when they aren't can attest to the great difference it makes to the ability of all to enjoy our river and riverfront parks.

(3) Increasing revenue to parks and limiting the days of operation of the tube rental would also help to lessen the environmental impact of tubing and its attendant waste on the San Marcos River.

(4) Last year, following a recommendation by the board and an analysis by Parks staff, the city raised fees and facility rental rates nearly across the board, but this increase in rates did not at the time extend to facilities that were under an existing long term lease agreement. Thus extending it, once such leases are up for renewal, would seem warranted, since the reason for not extending them before was simply that these were already under lease. Moreover, the increase in fees and rental rates has affected accessibility for low-income residents, and such accessibility could potentially be increased if rental rates for such facilities were now increased (bringing more revenue to parks and perhaps reducing other fees). 

We value these aims highly and think that the majority of San Marcos citizens do, too. 

As members of the Parks and Recreation advisory board, it is our role to be stewards of the city's parks and greenspaces. Hence, we support policies that help protect and enhance these spaces, provided such policies are pragmatic, economical, and fair. In our view, a renegotiated lease with Lions Club, with the contractual stipulations we've recommended to council, meets these conditions.

Eric Gilbertson,

San Marcos Parks and Recreation Board Member

San Marcos