A visit to Camp Packer Creek
The $6,000 budget item for Camp Packer Creek that Realist identified last month was earmarked as a 2006 Scholarship. After some investigation, this amount pales in comparison to the operations budget over the past several years. Other questions about the camp also remain as on 11/7/06 council adopted the city’s park improvement plan with the elimination of funds for Camp Packer Creek.
Here are the actual expenses for “Recreation” and “Maintenance” since 2000:
2000: $46,392.18 (Rec.) and $20,816.82 (Maint.) is $67,209 (participant numbers are unknown as I didn’t ask for them for ‘00)
2001: $59,175.76 (Rec) and $18,763.94 (Maint.) is $77,939.70 for “5-8 kids per week” (total participation for year not included)
2002: $57,696.04 (Rec.) and $15,859.62 (Maint.) is $73,555.66 for “5-8 kids per week up” or 33 kids total (who paid $20 each for “processing”)
2003: $54,306.17 (Rec.) and $18,756.74 (Maint.) is $73,062.91 for 26 kids total
2004: $11,843.90 (Rec.) and $34,426.12 (Maint.) is $46,270.02 for 19 kids total
2005: $9.90 (There are Rec. itemizations for $1,016.93 in salaries and $944.99 in benefits) and $17,415.65 (Maint.) is $17,425.55 for no kids (“we switched to private rentals”)
2006: $5,207.53 (Rec.) and $15,228.83 (Maint.) is $20,436.36 for no kids (“and the same this year”)
2007: $4,541.48 (Rec.) and $14,458.52 (Maint.) is $19,000 (“not yet finalized) for no kids (“non operational”)
Note: Missing from the budget are donations. According to a staff “guestimate” there were a total of 65 donations made for camp scholarships between ’00 and ’04 with no dollar amount included.
According to my calculations, since 2000 about $394,896 has been spent on Camp Packer Creek for a “guestimate” of about 144 kids. That’s about $2,742 per kid who camped for one week each (this doesn’t include the $20 processing fee that was collected from some kids, however).
Aside from the obvious financial concerns, who has been using the camp since 2005? Why was the city offering the camp to private parties after council directed them to eliminate funding for it in November? (Since the Realist linked the camp brochure to his story last month, the city has taken it off their Web site). Why doesn’t the budget include revenue generated from private parties since 2005? Why was $6000 allocated for scholarships when the kid program stopped after 2004? Who owns the facility?
You can view the documents the city was able to make available by clicking the title of this story. The issue of access to these public records is for another blog.
34 comments:
Wow, great post Dino. That is just wrong. That is how actual expenses get buried in other budgets. What a waste of our tax dollars. Someone needs to own up to this mistake.
Probably Phil Marler!!!
SICK!
This should be a public outrage. In my opinion people should be fired for this kind of misuse of tax dollars.
Someone obviously wants to keep Camp Packer Creek open and is able to keep the funding for it. This is just my guess but I bet it has been someone's personal playground. It would be interesting to find out who has been using it over the last several years.
I am disgusted. Like I said before, SICK!
I used to go to Camp Packer Creek when it was owned by the YMCA. It can be a valuable property if taken care of correctly. If Woodland sells it off or gives it away we will loose a property we will never be able to get back.
Anonymous 3:58
You make a good point provided the city does own the property. Do you know for a fact that the camp belongs to the city? I ask this because recently I saw a reference from staff about the U.S. Forest Service as being the landlord.
You are becoming quite the muckraker Dino! Perhaps the name of this site should be changed to "The Woodland Jungle". I didn't know Camp Packer Creek even existed. I hope our councilmen will investigate and report back to the public why so many funds were spent on an unused facility. (Note to a previous poster: Don't use "loose" when you mean "lose")
One question I forgot to add: Why was a $20 processing fee charged to underprivileged kids receiving scholarships to attend the camp?
I wonder if the Daily democrat will try and spin a story on this and then take credit for it.
Did the council decide to cut the whole budget or just the $6k for the scholarships?
I was always under the impression it was the $6k at issue...could be wrong.
Anonymous 7:56 - It turns out the $6000 allocation that Realist talked about was for the scholarship fund only. For some reason, this item appears separate in the '06-'07 general budget draft posted on the city's Web site. Why that item showed up a year after they stopped sending kids to the camp is one question.
If you click on the title of this story, you will go to a page that includes links to "Emails" and "Packer Creek Budget." Under "Emails" on Page 3 is the council minutes for 11/7/06 that describe the elimination of Park Rehabilitation Capital Improvement Plan funds for the camp. The amount for that is $315,000 - - which was allocated for Everman Park improvements.
Also note that before the summer of 2003 council had directed that costs be reduced at the camp (which it was... from $73k to $46k).
As to the ownership of the camp, here is an excerpt from the 9/06 Parks report: "Park maintenance crews visited Camp Packer Creek earlier this month to finish up the 'wish list' from our landlords, the U.S. Forest Service." I assume part of the $20k Maintenance budget for last year covered the clearing of "70 trees throughout the camp." This statement makes me wonder who actually owns the camp.
The fact that it still is being paid on the budget makes me think that perhaps there is time remaining on a contractual lease with the US Forest Service.
It would indeed be shocking to have the city flat out defy the council. The city folks are dumb but not that courageous.
This may just be a fairly embarrassing lease that they don't want to admit to.
I would guess we just have some sort of lease agreement with the US forest service. We maintanence it and we have control. You should request any lease or sale or deed information regarding camp packer creek.
Rumor mill says a 99 year lease.
If in fact there is a lease. Who authorized the lease and was that made public that we would be signing a lease for what length of term. I want to know who said this was okay. We should be demanding those who agreed to this come forward.
How about opening this area up to the public. Maybe the city could recover some of the monies spent up till now. I'll bet the city could pay a park manager for a few summer months to stay there at much less expense. Charge $20 per car. Make the "wish list" available at Parks and Rec. And at the site itself for donated time. Wasn't Hiddleson pool saved from closure a couple years ago by a public donation?
I hear from people who have stayed there in years past. They have very fond memmories, and stories. I would love the opportunity to share in this camp.
According to this document: Notes
The city just renewed the lease in 06. Read line 14
Update doesn't necessarily mean renewal. They could have made some amendments or changes to the agreement to save money, trade work for value etc....
Again, not counting on the city being that smart, but you never know.
Good point on the update vs renewal. You might be correct on that. Dino, get a copy of the lease. That would be good reading.
Have any questions ask Mayor Flory as he has been on the Council for twenty years. He should have all the history of Camp Packer Creek????
anonymous 2:13
The Mayor also approved the budgets for the last twenty years?
I'm trying to get the terms of the lease without having to go through a request for public records.
In the meantime, I was provided a commission report from last summer. It states:
"Recent rentals of Camp Packer Creek have been successful. Camp was opened to the City’s own Police officers and their families, and then the Yolo YMCA is going up for one week at camp. The YMCA will be followed up by a few more private family rentals for the summer. Our summer goal was to reach 30 rented days. We had originally thought we would achieve our goal, but with the YMCA backing out of two weeks, the goal may be a little more difficult to reach."
Let's see... IF the goal of 30 rented days actually means revenue (and not freebies given to city employees), that would be $10,500. ($350 is the daily rate according to the brochure the city just took off its Web site.) Hmmm... considering last year's expenses totalled $20,436 - - that would mean their goal would have been to lose almost $10K. I'm sure there could be explanations, but why wasn't the rental income part of the budgets I received from the city?
I am continually amazed at the lack of transparency in our local government. Questions like these only promote mistrust of our elected. Is it any wonder there is such a lack of respect for these positions. How can we change the attitude of this town in a positive direction when corruption, or ignorance resides at seemingly all levels?
As you can tell this type of government incompetency irritates me. We can't pick on just one person (Mayor Flory), Matt Rexroad was in the mayor's seat not too long ago. How did he handle the Camp Packer Creek issue? If the Mayor can't seem to get a handle on this issue (JM and Flory directed the city against the support of CPC), then who do we turn to?
You know what they say; if you see one roach, there are thousands you don't see. Is CPC an isolated Fo Paw? Is this just the tip of an iceberg?
I still say, open this place up to the public and stop the financial bleeding. Let's make good use of this space.
Downtown Merchant
I like your optimism! Just so you know, the camp has been open to the public since 2005 after they discontinued sending underprivileged kids there. From what I see, their business plan for 2006 was to lose $10,000. I'm not as optimistic about the enterpreneurial skills of the city.
To answer your question: Iceberg.
According to page 8 on this document, it appears that city employees and their families can go to this camp for free, but under privelaged kids must pay a $20 application fee? What is up with that??
anonymous 1:14 PM, I did not see the word free in this document. I did read the recent "rentals" were being opened up to a select few.
Dino, that does not look "open to the public" to me. Who do I contact for availability? Are there rates for a family of three for a weekend?
Downtown Merchant
I think Anon 1:14 interpreted "Camp was opened to the City’s own Police officers and their families..." as being "free" to city employees. I think that is an accurate assessment.
Rental prices as described in the brochure the city just took off their Web site are: $350 for the day, $2000 for the week. I guess you can take as many people up there as you want. The rates are for "exclusive" use of the facilities. To check out the brochure, click on the Camp Packer Creek label at the bottom of this blog. Go to the original blog "Wasting Money" and click on the "Camp Packer Creek" link.
The contact information is 661-5880 on the brochure. Call them and tell us what they said.
Woodland Merchant & Dino... This is not an isolated incident. Take for example the 400 acres the City owns off of the River road. The Council has tried to get that sold for years and years, but the staff always has an excuse like theres a ditch in the way or what ever. The real reason is it is a private Pheasant hunting club for City employees. Go out there on opening day and see who you find. While it is off limits and no trespassing to the general public. Do you think insurance would cover an accident out there? Dig into that one and see what you stir up. Many more as well, just keep digging.
Thanks for the tip 8:46. I will look into that.
Like I answered Downtown Merchant previously: Iceberg.
Stay tuned for Saturday. I will be posting about a downtown issue.
O K Dino, It is now Monday morning. Do you have more information for us? I will try to get the rental information today from parks and rec.
Downtown Merchant: Sorry for the delay. I'm still waiting for information on two items, the Camp Packer Creek lease terms and the downtown issue that I'd really like to comment on. I haven't forgotten, I've been asking...
Downtown Merchant: The lease terms are not forthcoming despite many requests. I have heard 50 years and 99 years, which doesn't tell me a whole lot.
The only information I have gotten is when I googled CPC. Rates and other info lead back to our parks and rec.
I went to Camp Packer Creek and was a camper and had the experience of a life-time. It was in.. I think 2000. I believe that if the city would just fix everything correctly and make it durable for the campers and the long winters the camp endures that the money would be well spent. We need to get some sort of over night camp back up for the children it is a great experience. Scholarships should not be awarded.
Post a Comment