Membership has its privileges, the old American Express advertising slogan used to say.
Bentonville may adopt a slightly modified idea: Residency has its privileges.
What’s the point?
Small increases in fees for non-resident participants of Bentonville’s sports programs seem a fair approach as the city evaluates its future needs.
City leaders have had discussions about parks and recreation programs that have been wildly successful. So successful, in fact, that the folks planning for the future have concerns about capacity and the city's ability to meet those needs.
That conversation has taken a slight us vs. them turn, as in the folks who live within the city of Bentonville and those who live outside its borders but still participate in Bentonville's recreational programs. The Parks and Recreation Department serves people within the Bentonville School District, which extends well beyond the city limits proper. The school district's boundaries stretch into Cave Springs, Bella Vista, Centerton and parts of Rogers.
Naturally, all the athletic fields and parks built and maintained by the city of Bentonville remain the obligation of the municipal government and, in turn, city residents. The people who operate the recreational programming are city employees. And, like every other city, the municipal government's first obligation is to provide services to its residents and businesses, not those outside the city's borders.
But there's sure something neighborly about a bigger town making its programs and facilities available to those beyond its borders, to county or small city residents who may not otherwise have access to such amenities. It's nice to see, and it recognizes in a local way that a city border doesn't necessarily define who one's neighbors are.
Parks officials, however, have to match the number of people they serve against the number they can afford. David Wright, parks and recreation director, told the City Council recently an example: The city has enough baseball and softball fields to serve city residents, but more will be needed if Bentonville continues to serve non-residents.
And that costs. A lot. A 10-year master plan for parks is expected to cost between $50 million and $50 million.
So, Wright suggests an possibility: Charge non-residents higher fees than those charged to city residents.
One effect would be to raise more money -- although no $50 million plan will be funded by recreational fees. The other might be to raise prices high enough that it discourages some non-residents from being involved.
That would be unfortunate for a city that has graciously involved its nonresidents in sports programs for years.
It's not unusual for fees for city services to include a differential for those who don't live within the city. Rogers adopted one for its Senior Activity Center years ago. The question is always how much is fair vs. how much is punitive.
If a city were to consider adopting punitive pricing, it may as well have the guts to limit participation to city residents only. But if fees for non-residents are $10 or $20 more per season, one could certainly understand Bentonville's need to be fair to its own residents.
Someone looking for a counterargument might examine how many nonresidents pay sales taxes to city coffers when they come into town to shop and dine.
Being neighborly has some value, so we encourage Bentonville to keep it friendly. As a youth league coach told this newspaper, a doubling of fees would have a big impact, but if the differential for non-residents is, say, $10, it's hard to argue the fee is too harsh.
Commentary on 01/23/2018