I serve as Chair of the Banning Planning Commission. The City budget’s a matter for the City Council. I’m writing here in my personal capacity and don’t speak on behalf of the Planning Commission.
Saturday night, a friend from Beaumont texted me from the Banning pool for Glow Night. Neighbors there had heard it might be the last night the pool would be open, and she was trying to figure out what was happening. Her family comes to our beloved city because our Parks and Rec programs are affordable and fun. She told me these very programs and events have become a big part of their lives.
We hear all the time about Banning families driving to Beaumont and beyond for everything. Yet, here was a family from Beaumont coming here because Banning had something they valued and could actually still afford.
The proposed budget takes Parks from 4 budgeted full-time-equivalent positions to 2, Recreation from 15 to 0, and Aquatics from 13 to 0. Across the 3, that’s a 94% cut in staffing.
Parks and Rec is one of the parts of City Hall people feel in their everyday lives. We experience it as the pool in the summer, sports and classes, the park down the street, or meals and activities at the Senior Center. I grew up a city rec kid myself. A child today can swim at the Repplier Aquatic Center for $2.50. Almost 23K people went through the Aquatic Center in just last year and the Senior Center provided more than 9K meals to our elders.
Earlier this year, I went to a community meeting about the old Armory on West Nicolet. The City’s working on plans to turn it into a year-round community and climate resiliency center. A mother from the Eastside said even a few dollars for the pool, or $1 to use a basketball court, were keeping her family and other families she knew from going. Somebody responded by explaining that nothing’s free. That immediate response really bothered me. We had a mom being vulnerable about her financial situation and the response seemed to completely dismiss her struggle.
Here we are a few months later, now talking about getting rid of the very programs she was trying to tell us her family already struggled to afford. I felt that pain yesterday as the Council Chambers filled up for the budget workshop. We had neighbors from every generation, along with City employees, parents and people who use these programs pack the Council Chambers. Some spoke through tears, anger, shock. For most, it seemed even talking about cutting 94% of the staffing across Parks, Recreation and Aquatics was ludicrous. Our resilient neighbors showed up with the receipts: employees knew their departments, families knew the programs they use, and people had ideas about what could be done differently.
“What I don’t get is why a problem that took years to build now feels like something residents have a few days to absorb.”
The City’s financial problems have been obvious for years now. The proposed General Fund only has $19,134 more coming in than going out and still ends the year about $9.72 million in the negative. I’m not going to pretend we can keep spending money we don’t have or that nothing should change.
And Parks and Rec isn’t the only department in trouble. The proposed budget cuts nearly half of the City’s General Fund staffing. About 30 filled positions could be lost, including the City’s Homeless Services Coordinator. Police, Planning, Building and Safety, Code Enforcement, Animal Control and other departments are being cut too.
What I don’t get is why a problem that took years to build now feels like something residents have a few days to absorb. The City Manager says in the budget itself that this crisis developed gradually over eight years. Back in May, the City was already identifying recreation, aquatics, park maintenance and senior programs as services vulnerable to cuts during the fiscal crisis. So none of this started Tuesday.
Perhaps there are good reasons it took until August to get to these numbers. The books needed to get caught up and the City needed to know what it was actually working with. But that shouldn’t mean residents need to be rushed through the part where we decide what disappears. And it shouldn’t be presented as the only option before we know what the real alternatives are.
If Recreation goes from 15 positions to 0 and Aquatics goes from 13 to 0, we need to know what the other options cost. Could the pool open for a shorter season? Can some recreation programs stay? What can Parks actually maintain with two people? What happens at the Senior Center? The budget itself says departments are still working through what these cuts would mean for services. We should know that before the numbers become the new normal.
There’s another City Council budget workshop tomorrow, Thursday, August 20, at 4 p.m. If these programs matter to your family, your job or your life in Banning, pull up.
Yesterday brought out neighbors from across the city and Banning’s honesty and brilliance was on full display, public comment after public comment. Residents were willing to sit there for hours and do the work. City Hall needs to match that with clear answers neighbors can actually use.
We spent years getting here. Taking a little more time to understand what we’re cutting and what the real alternatives are is the least we can do. People’s livelihoods depend on it.