Joseph Ciso and another public commenter voiced concerns about the impact of increased fees at Warm Mineral Springs, particularly on residents with fixed incomes. Ciso emphasized that such amenities are vital for retirees and the local economy. The city manager noted that the parks and recreation director, Sandy Funhiller, had implemented a phased plan that adjusted multi-visit pass fees and introduced a special rate for Sarasota County residents. The removal of the annual pass category, due to low sales, was also a part of this restructuring.

In response to Commissioner David Duval’s inquiry, it was clarified that sales of non-resident 30-visit passes increased due to changes in residency classifications. Vice Mayor Barbara Langdon’s question about facility capacity led to the revelation that Warm Mineral Springs limits access to around 600 individuals to ensure safety, particularly regarding lifeguard oversight.

Commissioner Demetrius Petrow raised the possibility of senior discounts, which highlighted the complex balance between fiscal responsibility and community needs.

Alongside the pricing debate, the council also revisited the topic of the annual pass, which had seen a slight uptick in sales before its discontinuation. The council considered whether to reinstate the pass at previous rates or modify it according to the phased plan. The projected fund balance for the end of September 2026, nearly $1.7 million, was also considered in the context of ongoing building renovations at the springs, with a guaranteed maximum price expected by March.

Another area of focus was the city’s sponsorship policy, which had not been updated since 2019. The city manager and the director of park recreation services proposed a revamped policy to align with the city’s growth and increased event attendance, which had risen by 31% in recent years. The proposed policy introduced new sponsorship levels and adjusted existing ones to reflect this growth and ensure that financial contributions corresponded with event costs and the exposure sponsors received.

Some council members questioned the rationale behind increasing the minimum contribution for presenting sponsors from $2,000 to a range of $4,000 to $10,000. Concerns about how these scales would be determined and justified were raised, highlighting the need for transparency and fairness. Public spaces, such as ballpark fences, were considered for sponsorship opportunities, though it was emphasized that the focus would remain on more visible event elements.

Discussions also touched on the amenity sponsorship fee, which was recommended to be reduced from $5,000 to $2,500 due to limited interest at the higher price point. The representative explained that feedback from potential sponsors had not directly addressed pricing, but the previous fee was perceived as too high. Marketing outreach strategies, including personal and email campaigns, were employed to engage potential sponsors, including those outside North Port.

The Vice Mayor sought clarity on specific revenue goals for signature events, with current sponsorship revenue offsetting about 10% of direct costs. Inquiries were made about the first right of renewal for existing sponsors, with Quality TV being mentioned as having expressed a preference for a single event sponsor to reduce attendee confusion.

Public comments highlighted concerns from current sponsors about changes in exclusivity and value perception. A sponsor noted expectations of exclusive rights, which had been diluted by recent changes, urging the council to fairly distribute sponsorship costs across different levels.