Cape Canaveral reviews community center fees after insurers pay below city rates

Cape Canaveral officials and the Culture & Leisure Services Board met in a joint workshop to review the community center fee schedule and participation in third‑party insurance programs such as SilverSneakers. The session included a staff presentation of usage and finance data and a broad discussion of administrative and legal options.

The meeting opened at 4:10 p.m. and staff summarized membership and check‑in data for the fiscal year. Staff reported roughly 304 active SilverSneakers members who recorded about 6,948 check‑ins over the year (an average of roughly 23 visits per SilverSneakers member annually). Staff also said the city receives substantially less per visit from some third‑party programs and estimated a recurring revenue shortfall in the range of $40,000–$50,000 per year tied to the difference between insured member payments and the city’s posted daily and monthly rates.

‘‘No decision has to be made this evening,’’ the City Manager said, framing the workshop as an information and policy‑direction meeting. Council members and board members discussed three primary paths: end participation in insurer programs, create a tiered membership that separates gym access from court access (for example, a court pass), or keep the current structure but pursue contract renegotiation.

Council member Willis pressed staff on whether the city had begun negotiations with insurers and urged starting with a baseline of what insurers will pay. Staff and multiple board members flagged an operational problem: the registration system cannot reliably track per‑member visit caps imposed by some insurers (commonly the first 10 visits are reimbursed and subsequent visits are unpaid), making enforcement of co‑pays or limits difficult under the current setup.

Board members debated using a ‘‘court pass’’ or premium membership to capture court‑based activity (pickleball, tennis, basketball) separately from general gym usage. Supporters said many regular court users would pay a modest court fee for reliable access; others warned that any change must be administrable and equitable for residents and seasonal visitors.

The City Attorney cautioned that participation in third‑party insurance programs is a policy decision for the council and recommended legal review of existing provider documents. Staff agreed to compile and share contracts and financial spreadsheets showing the facility’s revenues and expenses so council can assess tradeoffs.

The council and advisory board directed staff and legal to review the insurer contracts for legal obligations and renegotiation opportunities, refine administrative options for visit tracking, and return with proposed fee changes (including a possible court pass and tiered membership) timed to upcoming meetings and the budget cycle. No formal vote or change to the fee schedule was taken at the workshop.

‘‘I really enjoy it … Jamie is a gem for the city,’’ public commenter Bernie Lennon told the board, urging continued programming and staff support. The council said it wants to protect resident access while ensuring the facility becomes more financially sustainable and asked staff to return with concrete options.