Spencer Sacks
UPDATE: The article has been updated to reflect the court documents, which were provided to KTVZ News through the Madras Aquatic Center Recreation District’s website.
MADRAS, Ore. (KTVZ) — A lawsuit filed against the Madras Aquatic Center Recreation District (MACRD) was dismissed by the Jefferson County Circuit Court. The court indicated it would strongly consider awarding reasonable attorney fees to MACRD if the same claims are pursued again and dismissed.
2026.06.10+General+Judgment+of+Dismissal-c1_RedactedDownload
The lawsuit, titled Boynton et al. v. Madras Aquatic Center Recreation District, Case No. 25CV64941, included allegations concerning District operations. These allegations involved summer operations, staffing and hours, use of District facilities by partner organizations, Budget Committee communications and meeting minutes.
The Madras Aquatic Center Recreation District had disputed the claims and filed a motion to dismiss the case.
The court granted MACRD’s motion to dismiss. According to a statement from MACRD, the court’s ruling warned that if petitioners pursue another lawsuit asserting the same dismissed claims and that complaint is dismissed in a similar fashion, the court will strongly consider an award of reasonable attorney fees and costs in favor of MACRD against the petitioners.
MACRD provides this statement for the completeness of the public record. The district stated it remains focused on responsible governance, public service and the continued operation of District programs, services and facilities.
From the MACRD’s website:
Boynton, et al v. Madras Aquatic Center Recreation District, Jefferson County Circuit Court Case No. 25CV64941
Was the FY2025-26 budget approved illegally?
The State of Oregon has local budget laws that government entities are required to follow. A budget committee, consisting of the elected board members and an equal number of district voters/community members, vote to approve a budget, and then the budget goes to the elected governing body for adoption.
The MACRD budget committee voted 4-3 to approve the FY2025-26 budget on June 4, 2025. No one at the meeting was aware that the State had changed its interpretation of the required votes for approval to a majority of seated members (rather than the majority present at the meeting). As a result, it is true that the budget was not approved correctly. The MACRD Board of directors voted 4-0 to adopt the FY2025-26 budget on June 18, 2025.
Once this error was identified, at a special district’s training held on September 22, 2025, staff immediately reached out to the Department of Revenue for guidance. They reviewed the situation and provided theattached memo, resolving the issue.
Why did the MAC close in summer 2025?
The MAC closed from June 2025-August 2025 because there was not enough cash to pay for operations through November 2025 (when property tax revenues are available). Every year, the MACRD receives a tax anticipation loan from Jefferson County to ‘cash flow’ the district until November. In July 2024, a large utility roll tax adjustment occurred in Jefferson County, reducing the MACRD’s general property tax revenue by $38,882 and the bond repayment tax revenue by $36,775. In addition, the assumptions built into the adopted budget used the inflated collections from 2024 as a baseline, so the total reduction to the MACRD general fund budget in FY2024-25 as a result of the utility roll correction was approximately $80,000, plus the $40,000 the debt fund was now short for making the final bond payment, making the total hit to the general fund $120,000 (or approx 10% of the total budget). As a result, the district had to use cash from the tax anticipation loan for FY2025-26 to make the final bond payment in June 2025, resulting in less cash to pay for staffing and utilities over the summer. The board decided to close the pool for the summer to have enough cash to get to November, and to use the opportunity to come into compliance with new State aquatics rules that were adopted in Spring 2025.
Why does it take so many staff for the MAC to have an open rec swim?
The State of Oregon requires that the district maintain a ratio of one lifeguard for every 40 patrons. American Red Cross (ARC), our lifeguard certifying agency, recommends a one lifeguard to every 25 patrons ratio, and also has requirements for where lifeguard stands should be placed around the facility. As a result, the MAC needs, at minimum, 3 lifeguards on deck, actively scanning the lap and leisure pools and spa, to have 120 patrons in the pools. In addition, one lifeguard and either a lifeguard or deck attendant are required (by State law) to monitor the water slide (a staff member at the top, and a lifeguard at the bottom), as well as an ‘off-rotation’ lifeguard in the first-aid room in case of a medical emergency (and to rotate into the lifeguard lineup; ARC requires that lifeguards rotate stations to stay alert every 15-30 minutes). In addition to lifeguards, the MAC has a deck supervisor and patron services staff member onsite, with responsibilities during an emergency response and to provide services to patrons during MAC open hours. The total number of staff required for an open swim, the most staff-intensive activity offered at the MAC, is eight with a maximum of 120 patrons in the building, and we add another lifeguard for every 40 patron spots that are needed/opened.
Why do the locker rooms need to be fixed?
The walls in the MAC locker room were identified as ‘disintegrating’ as early as 2011/12, two years after the pool opened to the public. At the time, the facilities staff member discovered it and reported it to the executive director and the board of directors. The facilities manager did “solicit quotes to replace the sheetrock”, but from future board meetings/reports it seems that no action was taken at that time. Sometime between 2015-2017, the executive director worked with the original builder and the district’s insurance company and a settlement was reached with the original builder for using improper materials in a pool environment in the locker room, hallway, and office walls. It seems as though those funds were spent on general operations that year and not used to remediate/fix the walls, as it looks like a project was planned for Spring 2018 to fix the locker room walls that was not completed. In an email dated May 15, 2019, the executive director communicated to the board that facilities staff had opened up “windows” in the drywall in the locker rooms to assess the state of the walls and “found that the actual damaged areas are more extensive than originally discussed”. He indicated that he had reached out to the Jefferson County Public Health Department and expressed that he was told that as long as it was covered/not exposed, that it did not pose a health threat and the pool can remain open. This is all based on reviewing files and not current staff’s direct experience, so dates/details reflect what could be confirmed from researching staff notes, reports and emails. In 2020, a project was initiated to clean up the baseboards of the walls in the locker room, hallway, and office exterior walls as an interim measure until a replacement of the walls could occur, buying the district 5-10 years of time before that project needed to be completed.
Is the MAC a clean air, cooling and warming shelter?
Yes, when weather and/or air quality conditions meet the district’s policy threshold for opening as a shelter, the MAC will open to the public during regular business hours. The Inclement Weather and Environmental Quality Policy is available here.
Why did the MACRD choose to put a permanent tax rate on the ballots in May 2024 and 2025?
The district hired a consultant to do a business plan based on the 2023-2033 Master Plan in December 2024 (see district plan documents above). The business plan found that the district needs $1.4-$1.6 million in property taxes to support the programs, services and facilities that community members identified as priorities in the master plan. The current permanent property tax rate of $0.25/1,000 (brings in approximately $290,000/year) and local option levy at $0.40/1,000 (brings in approximately $450,000/year). To put it in perspective, the MAC facility expenses for one year, without staff costs, was $285,600 plus another $35,435 for liability insurance (FY2024-25).
This financial reality means that the district could not continue to offer the same level of services, while addressing the capital maintenance needs of MAC and maintaining a balanced budget. The board of directors considered several options to fill the funding gap and chose to pursue a permanent property tax levy to create long-term sustainability, and support priorities for facilities and programming that the community identified in the master plan as important to the communities we serve. The timing of paying off the original construction bond that was levied at $0.54/1,000 in 2024, seemingly made the messaging of “no new taxes” helpful, which was part of why $1.19/1,000 was chosen for the final proposed permanent tax levy rate. If the district had gone out for a local option levy and passed it, every 5-years it would need to go out again and message that, if it failed, programs and services would be reduced (many times this is interpreted as “threatening” the public to vote a certain way). In addition, the cost of elections every 5-years is significant, both financially and from a volunteer/time commitment perspective.
To complicate matters, the State of Oregon does not provide a way to change a permanent tax rate. As a result, the district was required to put two measures on the ballot, which many found confusing. One measure was to dissolve the existing district, and the second was to create a new district with a new permanent tax rate. This solution would have set the recreation district up as a fully-functioning recreation district for years to come, and its failure has resulted in the district re-prioritizing aquatics recreation programming to ensure tax payer dollars are used wisely and for the original intended purpose of the district when it was created in November 2004.
Click here to follow the original article.
