Maximizing public access to facilities at the new Sports Pavilion Lawrence must be a top priority. It’s great for the city to attract revenue-producing tournaments and camps to the facility, but officials also have an obligation to make sure the new recreation center serves local residents — the taxpayers who are paying for it.

Members of the previous Lawrence City Commission understood that when they guaranteed that at least one court at the Sports Pavilion would be open at all times for public free play. Allowing tournaments to use all of the basketball/volleyball courts at the facilities a few times a year probably is acceptable, but firm limits on those exceptions need to be set.

At tonight’s meeting, commissioners will be asked to allow large tournaments to reserve all eight courts at the Sports Pavilion. Parks and Recreation officials say they would only expect three or four events a year that need all the courts, and that they would commit to keeping at least one gym open for free play at one of the city’s other recreation centers on weekends when all the courts are reserved at the Sports Pavilion.

One court at one recreation center may be the best the city can promise, but it’s too bad that every city recreation center doesn’t provide free play opportunities on its courts every weekend. Those courts provide a great gathering place for families or groups of youngsters or adults to get together and shoot a few baskets.

Preempting free-play to accommodate three or four larger events each year probably isn’t a problem, but the City Commission shouldn’t just leave that scheduling to the discretion of Parks and Rec officials. They should set a firm maximum (maybe six a year) and when that limit is met, no exceptions should be granted.

The city’s aquatic centers are closed from time to time for special tournaments. It’s nice to be able to accommodate those events that bring many visitors to Lawrence. The same is true for the Sports Pavilion, but in either case, closing public facilities to the public that is paying for them, should be an exception, not the rule.

Waiving the requirement to keep one court at the Sports Pavilion open for the public may be acceptable, but it easily could get out of hand. City officials have to make sure it doesn’t.

The current request should not be a means for promoters of the Sports Pavilion to get their foot in the door, leading to other concessions. How many other requests for changes may be on the way?