HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council Workshop - Minutes - 06/18/2019
Approved
City Council Workshop
Workshop Regular Meeting
Minutes
June 18, 2019
Date: June 18, 2019
Time: 5:05 p.m.
Place: Chambers
I. CALL TO ORDER
Attendee Name Title Status Arrived
Dennis Higgins Councilmember Present
Les Thomas Councilmember Present
Bill Boyce Council President Present
Dana Ralph Mayor Present
Satwinder Kaur Councilmember Present
Brenda Fincher Councilmember Present
Toni Troutner Councilmember Present
Marli Larimer Councilmember Present
II. PRESENTATIONS
1. Parks, Recreation and Community Services Comprehensive
Recreation Program Plan
Julie Parascondola, Parks, Recreation and Community Services Director
provided an introduction to the Comprehensive Recreation Program Plan
presentation.
As you recall from the presentation shared at the City Council Retreat earlier
this year, the Parks Department as a whole, over the next 4 years, is and will
be going through extensive transformational change with a lot of mid/long
term strategic planning occurring. This effort began with the Park Operations
Division with their new level of service framework, followed by the Riverbend
Golf Complex Business Plan completed in 2018 and the recently completed
Marketing and Engagement Plan to be presented in July. Parascondola
informed Council they will be sharing more on the Recreation Program Plan,
later this month will begin launching the update to the 5-year Human
Services Master Plan and Consolidated Plan and rounding out the biennium,
with a new updated 20-year Facilities Master Plan which will start late 2019.
Parascondola indicated the need to think strategically is critical for the long-
term success of our department. She noted that the Parks Departmnet, both
in the past and present day, has continued to receive the disproportionate
share of budget reductions due to the City’s financial challenges and/or
priorities.
City Council Workshop Workshop Regular
Meeting
Minutes
June 18, 2019
Kent, Washington
Page 2 of 7
Unfortunately, in parallel, the Kent community has continued to grow in
population, underserved residents need the City's support now more than
ever, youth throughout the City need a commitment to help guide them to
success, the health of the community is at staggering levels of risk, ranking
in the bottom throughout all of King County. There are high demands and
unmet needs for City services and so on. Unfortunately, she stated, it puts
the department and staff in a constant defensive position in trying to balance
needs versus funding. Parascondola stated that the City needs to actively
work with the community to jointly make those hard decisions on what to
focus funding on, to right-size services, programs and infrastructure to better
align with the funding allocation provided. At the same time, internally,
there is a need to evolve mindsets and practices to be more entrepreneurial
on how the City plans and delivers services, evaluates performance and most
importantly, how we continue to engage those we serve, in that decision-
making and prioritization process.
The plans Parascondola and her team have brought forward have had
thousands of community feedback points from residents, they are analyzing
industry and regional trends, best practices, peers and more. It will guide the
next phases of delivery but will also give staff the need framework and
decision-making models to both pro-actively and re-actively divest in
programs and services, if so mandated. She stated the department can no
longer meet the needs of the community or absorb continued budget cuts
without equivalent impacts to public services.
We are here specifically today, to share a bit more about the development of
our Recreation Program Plan, the first of its kind in Kent, which began in
February this year with a goal to finalize in late August.
Parascondola publicly recognize and thanked the entire Recreation division
for their willingness to engage in the development of the Recreation Program
Plan, for their transparency in sharing both their successes and their
struggles, for their perseverance and fortitude in weathering consistent
uncertainty, sticking it out, and most all for continuing to put Kent’s residents
at the forefront, many times sacrificing their personal time with their own
families.
Parascondola said that she believes following the presentation there will be a
new appreciation for just how complex and interconnected the back end of
public recreation programming really is. She stated that is is important for
the policy leaders to understand what is being asked of the recreation
professionals in the new plan moving forward. The way that they are going to
manage Kent’s programming framework and portfolio, only 3 other agencies’
in this state are similar in managing to that same level of excellence - out of
230+ recreation systems in Washington. She stated it is the right thing to
City Council Workshop Workshop Regular
Meeting
Minutes
June 18, 2019
Kent, Washington
Page 3 of 7
do for staff, it’s the right thing to do for the residents and she is personally
excited to see them rise to yet another occasion to showcase their dedication
and collective talents.
Leon Younger, the Founder and President of PROS, and Austin Hochstetler,
the plan’s Project Manager provided details regarding the Comprehensive
Recreation Program Plan that included details on:
Parks System History - Excellence in the City
National Gold Medal Awards
• Kent Parks and Recreation -
• 1987 Gold Medal Finalist Award for Parks & Recreation
• 1988 Gold Medal Grand Award Winner for Parks & Recreation
• 1989 and 1990 Gold Medal Finalist Award for Special Recreation
• 1991 Gold Medal Grand Award Winner for Special Recreation
Kent Parks System
Reviewed Staffing and funding from 1957 - 2019 - Demonstrates how
department has had to adapt through reductions in staffing.
Reviewed population increase, City’s investment for recreation compared to
City growth.
Kent’s population is projected to increase by 28,000 people over the next 15
years.
Recreation career staff investments vs. other City service investment
Understanding the planning context
How people use the services
What is most important
NW research group did 2 community surveys
· Key drivers for livability - using the 5-star rating
· Parks and recreation contributions to quality of life
o Community and neighborhood parks
o Public trails
o Public arts & community events
o Sports fields and complexes
· Parks and recreation ratings
o Proximity & available of City
o Quality of Park Amenities
o Quality of Youth activities
o Safety within City Parks & Trails
· Community Health - Seattle/King County Health Dept.
World Health Organization defines health as the state of complete physical,
mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or
infirmity.
City Council Workshop Workshop Regular
Meeting
Minutes
June 18, 2019
Kent, Washington
Page 4 of 7
· Updated 2018-2019 Community Health Needs Assessment
South King County is most racially ethnically diverse communities in King
County
Discussion and Next Steps
• 8-year action plan development
• Report development and completion
• Discussion with staff, partners, and Commissions on recommendations
• Final report and briefing
• Adjustments and shifts:
• Minor shifts to begin in 2020
• Larger adjustments and shifts to rollout with the 2021-2022 budget
development process
Reviewed results regarding Kent’s Youth
There is an estimated 35,000 youth in Kent
Kent Youth Call to Action: Catalyst of Change. Established vision built with
Kent
Reaching Underserved Populations
· 14 Determinants of equity - The Conditions King County has identified that each
of us need to thrive.
· Negative Repercussions - When people lack access to the determinants of
equity, they lack opportunity. The resulting inequities impact the whole
community.
· Parks and Recreation’s role in Kent:
o Social equity and inclusion
o Arts and culture
o Economic development
o Placemaking and brand image
o Health and wellness
o Youth development
o Healthy aging
o Public land and facility stewards
o Sustainability
o Contribution to transportation
The planning processes - How approached and key findings
Comprehensive Recreation Program Plan
Where are we today?
Where are we going tomorrow?
How do we get there?
City Council Workshop Workshop Regular
Meeting
Minutes
June 18, 2019
Kent, Washington
Page 5 of 7
Data Findings and Tasks Completed
Demographics
o Total population, households, median age, median household income, race
o Population be age segment and race 2010-2018 and projections -2033
o Trends - General Sports Market Potential Index - Market driven consumer
behavior for general sports.
o Trends - Top 5 most offered core program areas
Interviews and Focus Groups (Stakeholders):
o Elected Officials
o Boards and Commissions
o Staff
o User Groups
o City Departments
Key Stakeholder Themes:
Community Engagement
· Community Survey
Top 5 unmet need areas:
· Fitness & wellness programs
· Outdoor events
· Cultural performances
· Outdoor recreation
· Aquatic programs
Reviewed most popular programs currently used and high priority services
areas
Key survey findings
· Community outcomes
· Prioritization of services
· Program interest areas
Recreation Program Assessment
o Adaptive Recreation Programs
o Cultural Programs
o Senior Programs
o Youth and Teen Programs
o Facility-Based Programs
· Revenue Earned by Program Area
· Lifecycle of Program Now and the future
· Age Segmentation by program area
· Program Classification mix
City Council Workshop Workshop Regular
Meeting
Minutes
June 18, 2019
Kent, Washington
Page 6 of 7
· Program Cost recovery
· Fee Philosophy
· Recommended Performance Management
o Key program performance indicators
o General program indicators
· Key Recommendation Interest Areas
1. Financial Stability - Challenges: structural deficit, continued budget cuts, long
term sustainability, and ability to shift and test programs due to constant
flux.
2. Partnerships - Challenges: leveraging resources, enhancing facilities, meeting
unmet need/defining roles, and clarifying city vs. parks & recreation roles.
3. Recreational Programming - Challenges: duplication of services, who is doing
what and where? Rightsizing the portfolio, owning the market(s) and uniting
the community.
4. Facility/Capital Development - Challenges: lack of indoor space, existing
footprints, and meeting community need.
5. Organizational Structure Staffing - Challenges: organizational resiliency,
meeting best practice, succession planning, and ability to retain and recruit
staff.
Next Steps:
· 8-Year action plan development (short-, mid-, and long-term strategies)
· Report development and completion - Discussion with staff, partners, and
Commissions on recommendations
· Final report and briefing
· Adjustments and shifts
o Minor shifts to begin in 2020
o Larger adjustments and shifts to rollout with the 2021-2022 budget
development process.
Council President Boyce indicated this is the City’s next challenging
opportunity to address, and that we have the right leader. He pledged to do
what he can to figure out how to bring our park’s system back to the 1988
Gold Medal status.
Councilmember Larimer requested clarification on the Key survey findings
program area interest for residents and how it compares with other parts of
the country.
Councilmember Kaur expressed appreciation and indicated parks are
important to our community and it is important to fund them properly.
Councilmember Higgins suggested looking into the potential of creating a
metro parks district.
City Council Workshop Workshop Regular
Meeting
Minutes
June 18, 2019
Kent, Washington
Page 7 of 7
Councilmember Fincher expressed her appreciation of the directed outreach
to diverse communities.
Councilmember Troutner indicated the fiscal cliff required tough decision be
made and that Parks was hit the worst. Troutner agrees to make parks a
priority.
Mayor Ralph indicated she is encouraged by councils comments and that they
are committed to making our parks outstanding. Mayor is excited about the
planning process - clear this plan will be implemented.
2. West Hill Water Supply
Due to the length of the Parks presentation, the West Hill Water Supply
presentation was moved to the July 16, 2019 workshop.
Meeting ended at 5:21 p.m.
Kimberley A. Komoto
City Clerk
Inspiring communities to action
Comprehensive Recreation Program Plan
Kent, WA
Agenda
System History
Planning Context
Existing System
Planning Process
Findings
Key Recommendations
Discussion and Next
Steps
History
3
National Gold Medal Awards
Honors communities throughout the United States that demonstrate excellence in
long-range planning, resource management, and innovative approaches to
delivering superb park and recreation services with fiscally sound business
practices.
Kent Parks and Recreation -
o 1987 Gold Medal Finalist Award for Parks & Recreation
o 1988 Gold Medal Grand Award Winner for Parks & Recreation
o 1989 and 1990 Gold Medal Finalist Award for Special Recreation
o 1991 Gold Medal Grand Award Winner for Special Recreation
4
Class of ‘88: Where Are They Now?
Long Beach, CA: Three gold medals since (each decade); largest municipally
operated marina system in the nation
South Suburban, CO: Six gold medal finalists since and one gold medal; program
revenue increased 24%, CAPRA accredited in 2019
Schaumburg, IL: Two gold medals since; CAPRA accredited; the 90s were
highlighted by facility development (four major facilities); 2000s highlighted by
110,000ft2 indoor sports facility
Lemont Township, IL: Acquired and developed 10 parks (out of the system’s 19)
from 1985-1995; expanded the Centennial Community Center; constructed
70,000ft2 Fitness and Aquatic Complex
5
Kent Parks System
6
7
Class of ‘88: Where Are We Now?
Population increase of 97,650 residents since 1988 (30,350)
2019: Net loss vs adds –down (3) ball fields and (6) soccer fields)
8
9
Kent’s population is
projected to increase
by ~28,000 people
over the next 15
years.
Class of ‘88: Where Are We Now?
Note: Numbers do not include Regional Fire Authority.
10
Understanding the Planning Context
11
Community Interests
12
Key Drivers for Livability
13
Parks and Recreation Contribution to Quality of Life
14
Parks and Recreation Ratings
15
Community Health
Source: Seattle and King County Health Department -City Health Profiles 2012 and 2016.
https://www.kingcounty.gov/depts/health/data/city-health-profiles.aspx
World Health Organization defines
health as the state of complete
physical, mental and social well-being
and not merely the absence of
disease or infirmity.
Improved in city rankings.
Declined in city rankings.
16
2018-2019 King County Community Health Needs Assessment (CHNA)
South King County has the most racially ethnically diverse communities in King
County and are at a disproportionate risk of having poor health and social
outcomes.
Community Health Continued…
King County Community Health Priorities
(relevant sampling):
o Keeping kids engaged through after-school programs
and summer activities.
o Support youth to develop into confident and productive
adults.
o Assistance with older adults via transportation,
navigating health care, combating isolation, etc.
17
Estimated 35,000+ youth in Kent.
Kent School District (largest in Kent):
o 19.5% students NOT graduating; 48% on free/reduced meals, 65% youth of color, 2%
experiencing homelessness
From 2004 to 2016, youth rates of depressive feelings increased in King County overall; highest in the South Region.
Rise in youth marijuana and vaping use –the new epidemic
Average age of Kent youth referrals to the Prosecuting Attorney’s Office is 15.8 years old
Kent Youth Call to Action: Catalyst of Change. Established vision built with Kent youth providers, commitment to youth in the City.
Kent’s Youth
18
Reaching Underserved Populations
19
Negative Repercussions
20
Parks and Recreation’s Role in Kent
Social equity and inclusion
o Everyone has a right to and deserves parks and recreation
o Parks and recreation has high ability influence positive social equity
Arts and culture
o One of the primary providers of arts programming in Kent
o Arts are fundamental to our humanity
Economic development
o Improves the local tax base and increases property values
o One of the largest youth employers in the City
o Contributes to local and regional economies through sports and events
o Strengthens the City’s image
21
Parks and Recreation’s Role in Kent
Placemaking and brand image
o Inspires the City to reimagine and reinvent public spaces
o Connects neighborhoods
Health and wellness
o Major provider to influence community health
o Directly combats stress, diabetes, heart disease, obesity, etc.
o Improves mental health
Youth development
o Provides safe and fun alternatives for out of school time
o Promotes life skills and enrichment
22
Parks and Recreation’s Role in Kent
Healthy aging
o One of the largest providers of senior services in Kent
Public land and facility stewards
o Preserves, protects, and manages community investment
Sustainability
o Addresses the effects of climate change; sustainable practices
Contribution to transportation
o Human-powered transportation
o Creates linkages to regional trail systems
23
The Planning Process
24
Comprehensive Recreation Program Plan
Where Are We Today?
Site and facility review
SWOT analysis
Programs and services
assessments
Similar provider analysis
Mapping
Existing plan review (city, county,
schools)
Where Are We Going Tomorrow?
Stakeholder interviews and focus
groups
Statistically-valid survey
Online survey
Demographics & recreation trends
analysis review
Crowdsourcing website
How Do We Get There?
Needs prioritization
Funding and Revenue planning
Strategic action plan
implementation
25
Data Findings and Tasks Completed
26
Demographics…
26%24%24%23%23%
25%25%24%24%24%
29%26%26%25%24%
16%19%20%22%23%
4%5%5%6%6%
2010 2018 2023 2028 2033
Population by Age Segment
0-17 18-34 35-54 55-74 75+
Kent
55%50%46%43%40%
11%11%12%12%12%
17%21%23%25%27%
8%8%9%9%10%
6%7%7%8%8%
2010 2018 2023 2028 2033
Population by Race
White Alone Black Alone American Indian Asian
Pacific Islander Some Other Race Two or More Races
Kent
27
Trends…
105 104 103 102 102 101 101 100
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Jogging/
Running
Zumba Yoga Swimming Weight
Lifting
Pilates Aerobics Walking for
exercise
MP
I
S
c
o
r
e
s
Fitness MPI
Kent MPI National Average
107
101 98 98 96
95
86 86 84
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Bicycling
(mountain)
Fishing
(salt water)
Hiking Backpacking Bicycling
(road)
Horseback
Riding
Boating
(power)
Fishing
(fresh water)
Canoeing/
Kayaking
M
P
I
S
c
o
r
e
s
Outdoor Activity MPI
Kent MPI National Average
28
Trends…
Top 5 Most Offered Core Program Areas
(Offered by Parks and Recreation Agencies)
United States (% of agencies offering)Pacific Northwest Region (% of agencies offering)
•Team sports (86%)•Team sports (85%)
•Themed special events (84%)•Themed special events (85%)
•Social recreation events (81%)•Social recreation events (85%)
•Fitness enhancement classes (78%)•Fitness enhancement classes (85%)
•Health and wellness education (78%)•Health and wellness education (83%)
29
Interviews and Focus Groups
30
Stakeholders
Elected officials
o City Council
o City Administrator
o Mayor
Boards and commissions
o Arts Commission
o Cultural Communities Board
o Parks and Recreation Commission
Staff
o Park Administration
o Recreation and Cultural Services Division
User Groups
o Adaptive Recreation
o Facility Rentals
o Seniors
o Sports and Athletics
o Youth and Teens
o Youth Programming
o Greater Kent Historical Society
o Kent YMCA
City Departments
o Economic & Comm Development
o Finance
o Human Services: Youth Call to Action
31
Key Stakeholder Themes
Kent PRCS seems to offer something for everyone
Staff longevity is seen as a system strength
Kent PRCS has not yet been leveraged, maximized or seen as an
essential service impacting community outcomes
Key factors must be considered when planning for the next 5-10
years
o Changing demographics
o Budget reductions / long term financial sustainability
o Kent YMCA opening in Fall 2019
o Indoor and outdoor facility development
32
Key Stakeholder Themes
The future is all about relationships
Needed system improvements include equity considerations
Need to re-envision marketing and engagement, diversity focus
Telling the Kent PRCS story is a must
Programmatic changes must be able to shift as user consumptive
behavior shifts
Subsidized programming should exist but there is an opportunity to
generate revenue to offset operating costs
33
Community Engagement
34
Community Survey
Conducted by ETC Institute
Mailed to random sample of households
Goal: 400 / Completed: 408
Equitable Opinion:
o Geographic (West Hill vs. East Hill)
o Race/Ethnicity (54% White / 46% Residents of Color)
o Gender (50% Female / 48% Male)
SurveyMonkey
o Open access survey
o 553 responses
Unmet Need
Top (5) unmet need areas:
1.Fitness & wellness programs
2.Outdoor events
3.Cultural performances
4.Outdoor recreation
5.Aquatic programs
36
Key Survey Findings (general)
Most popular programs currently used include:
o Community events/festivals
o Sports leagues
o Arts and culture
High priority service areas over the next two years:
o Maintenance of parks/facilities
o Quality/number of indoor amenities
o Park/facility rule awareness and enforcement
37
Key Survey Findings (quality & awareness)
38
Key Survey Findings (community outcomes)
Top (5) areas where respondents believe parks
and recreation are somewhat or very valuable
contributors:
1.Enhancing Healthy Aging
2.Making Living in Kent Fun
3.Enhancing Community Connection
4.Protecting/Preserving the Environment
5.Enhancing Community Health
39
Key Survey Findings (prioritization of services)
77%of respondents believe it is equally
important or more important to fund parks,
trails and recreation facilities.
40
Q6. Compared to other City services (such as police, zoning,
code enforcement, and streets) how important is it to fund
parks, trails, and recreation facilities?
Areas that will reach the most community residents with additional
investment:
o Enrichment programs
o Outdoor programming in parks
o Nature programs
o Arts & crafts
o Performing arts programs
o Outdoor water recreation
Key Survey Findings (program interest areas)
o Outdoor events
o Fitness & wellness
o Cultural performances
o Outdoor recreation
o Senior programs (50+)
o Aquatics programs
41
Recreation Program Assessment
42
Analysis of Existing Core Program Areas
Adaptive Recreation Programs
o Creative Arts and Technology
o Health and Fitness
o Social
o Sports
Cultural Programs
o Festivals / Community Events
o Performing Arts
o Public Art
o Runs
o Visual Arts
Senior Programs
o Community Services
o Education
o Entertainment
o Fundraising/Promotion
o Health and Wellness
o Special Interest Groups
o Travel/Trips/Outdoor
Youth and Teen Programs
o After School (Youth)
o After School (Teens)
o Camps (Youth)
o Health and Wellness (Teens)
o Special Events (Outreach)
o Summer (Youth)
Facility-Based Programs
o Adult Sports
o Cultural / Community Education
o Health and Wellness
o Youth Sports
43
Revenue Earned by Program Area
44
Lifecycle of a Program
45
Lifecycle of Program (now and future)
Senior programs, youth and teen programs, and facility-based programs are close to best
practices.
Adaptive Recreation has the highest percentage of programs in the first stage.
Last stage programming is largely due to physical space and funding limitations.
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
46
Lifecycle Stage Description Recommended
Distribution
Introduction New program; modest participation 1%
Take-Off Rapid participation growth 6%
Growth Moderate, but consistent population growth 46%
Mature Slow participation growth 32%32%40%
Saturation Minimal to no participation growth; extreme competition 13%
Decline Declining participation 2%
Acutal Program
Distribution
52%50-60%
16%0-10%
Age Segmentation
Core Program Area Section Preschool (<5)Elem. School
(6-12)Teens (13-19)Adult (18+)Senior Adults (55+)All Ages
Creative Arts and Technology S P S
Health and Fitness S P S
Social S S P S
Sports S S P P
Festivals/Community Events P
Performing Arts P
Runs P
Adult Sports P P
Cultural/Education P P P P P P
Health and Wellness P P P P S P
Youth Sports P P P S S
Community Services S P
Education S P
Entertainment S P
Fundraising/Promotion S P S
Health and Wellness S P
Nutrition S P S
Special Interest Groups S P
Travel P
Volunteerism S P
After School (Youth)P
After School (Teen)P
Camps (Youth)P
Health and Wellness (Teen)P
Special Events (Outreach)P P P P S S
Summer (Youth)P
Adaptive Recreation
Cultural
Facility-Based
Senior
Youth and Teen
P = Primary Audience
S = Secondary Audience
47
Program Classification Mix
ESSENTIAL IMPORTANT VALUE ADDED
•Mostly PUBLIC good
•Aligns with City / Dept missions
•Serves majority of the community
•Limited or no alternative providers
“This program MUST be offered.”
•Mix of PUBLIC and PRIVATE good
•Important to the Community
•Services the broad community
•Alternate providers, but can’t meet
need or demand
“This program SHOULD USUALLY be
offered.”
•Mostly PRIVATE good
•Enhances community offerings
•Serves mostly niche groups
•Multiple alternate providers
available
“This program is NICE to offer.”
Kent Parks = 40%
Highest level of subsidy offered
Free or nominal fee
Kent Parks = 56%
Some level of subsidy offered
Fees cover some direct costs
Kent Parks = 4%
Limited to no subsidy
Fees cover most direct/indirect costs
Cost Recovery Target = 0-25%Cost Recovery Target = 25-75%Cost Recovery Target = 75% +
48
Program Cost Recovery
Cost Recovery Plan developed in June 2014 by GreenPlay, LLC
o Limited access to relevant data and cross division operating protocols hindered
past consistent implementation.
Common terminology and methodology needed
o Adopt and institutionalize the pyramid methodology (existing model)
o Adopt and institutionalize the classification of services methodology and align
them with corresponding cost recovery goals
o Developing as part of this plan with full implementation January 2020
49
Fee Philosophy
Analyze the following fee considerations:
o Adding dynamic pricing
o Resident vs. non-resident pricing, where applicable
•Challenges with youth programs where school districts are outside of Kent’s boundaries
•Challenges within adult leagues and the ability to track player residency
•Could impact revenue and program participation
PROGRAM AREA RESIDENT NON-RESIDENT NOTES
Adult 50+29%71%Does not include drop in Senior Center use.
Adaptive 65%35%
Adult Sports 51%49%Only based on coach, not players.
Community Events 38%62%Does not include concerts or 5Ks.
Cultural Arts 37%63%Does not include concerts or 5Ks.
Fitness & Wellness 64%36%
Preschool Programs 70%30%
Youth Program 72%28%
Youth and Teen Programs 65%35%
Analysis completed using
CLASS program registration
(zip codes) only.
Departments uses multiple
sources for registration that
may not be reflected.
Results have a variance
rate via accuracy and
reflection of actual
participation.
50
Recommended Performance Management
Key Program Performance Indicators (KPIs):o Program lifecycle
o Program classification
o Age segmentation
o Cancelation rates
o Participation trends
General Program Indicators:o Total programs offered
o Alignment with program/section objectives
o Program minimum/maximums
o Total participants
o Core program area alignment with community interests
o Qualitative feedback
o Social equity / underserved participants
All future program shifts should be made with an understanding of full costs of delivering programs and services, KPIs, and general program indicators.
51
Key Recommendation Interest Areas
52
Financial Stability
Challenges: structural deficit, continued budget cuts, long term sustainability, and ability to shift and test programs due to constant flux.
Cost recovery
Developing and retaining earned income (e.g., revolving fund)
New departmental policies (automatic annual fee inflation, reduction/discounts, dynamic pricing)
Ability to maintain consistent and appropriate level of fee (scholarship) assistance
Facility pass/membership structure (resident vs. non-resident)
Understanding impacts to maintenance (athletic complexes, facilities, event support, etc.) also impact recreation programs and quality
Divestment strategy, where applicable –understanding timing to shift, impacts on net revenue vs. total expenses, ratio of staff per # of programs, etc.
53
Partnerships
Challenges: leveraging resources, enhancing facilities, meeting unmet need/defining roles, and clarifying city vs. parks & recreation roles.
Partnership guidelines and accountability at all levelsoHolding funded partners to the same program expectations as staff –equal expectations
Community inventory (understanding alternate providers) and defining roles
Re -envision partnership with Kent School District
Kent YMCA –impacts to recreation, public perception, and opportunities to leverage and partner together
Ability to seek and develop partnerships while meeting program demand and need
54
Recreation Programming
Challenges: duplication of services, who is doing what and where?,
rightsizing the portfolio, owning the market(s), and uniting the community.
Core program areas
Adjustments into new areas requested from community
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and other data trackingoMini business plansoProgram decision-making matrixoAssignment of KPIs/performance track by staff level/position
Re -invigorating league play
Establish joint communication, service levels, and operating protocols with park and facility operations
55
Recreation Programming Cont…
The balance between serving residents and non-residents
Program divestment strategies and criteria (what do we keep vs. what do we cut?)
Emphasis on equity and identified underserved populations
Integrate and maximize the Department’s new Marketing and Engagement Plan and Marketing
Coordinator to increase participation, community awareness, and telling its story.
o Utilize recent quantifiable and qualitative surveys via cross tab analysis to focus marketing and outreach
efforts
o Create directed outreach to diverse community groups
Continue to articulate the relationship between recreation programming and city-wide health and
safety concerns
Position recreation as a driving force to seek NRPA Gold Medal/CAPRA accreditation
56
Facility/Capital Development
Challenges: lack indoor space, existing footprints, and meeting community
need.
Old/tired existing facilities influencing perception of experience
High user demand to turf remaining ballfields
In-demand programs stunted by space constraints
Allow programming to drive new facility design and development
Creative partnerships
Joint-use agreements
57
Organizational Structure/Staffing
Challenges: organizational resiliency, meeting best practice, succession planning,
and ability to retain and recruit staff.
Emphasis on professional development, morale, and burnout of staff
Staffing standards (i.e., capacity)
Due to heavy reliance on part-time and volunteers –create an outreach, recruitment,
and retention strategy to both maintain and enhance participation and quality of
applicants
Creation of staff succession planning to plan for key transitions due to pending
retirements
Functional alignment
58
Discussion and Next Steps
59
Next Steps
8-year action plan development (short-, mid-, and long-term
strategies)
Report development and completion
o Discussion with staff, partners, and Commissions on recommendations
Final report and briefing
Adjustments and shifts:
o Minor shifts to begin in 2020
o Larger adjustments and shifts to rollout with the 2021-2022 budget
development process
60
What Are Your Thoughts?
Q&A
61
Questions?
62