May 2014 - Parks & Recreation - 55

Department requires organizers to
cover direct costs of the massive
Outside Lands Music Festival
(70,000 attendees over three days)
and the Hardly Strictly Bluegrass
Festival (300,000 attendees over
three days) in Golden Gate Park.
Those and similar fees end up
providing 35 percent of Rec and
Parks' budget and have supported
infrastructure investments, paid for
gardeners, and funded scholarships
and recreational programming.
Some park agencies in newer,
low-density cities have built
facilities specifically to host outof-town visitors for sporting
events. In Arizona, Tucson's
Kino Sports Complex, a massive
regional tournament facility run
by Pima County, brings in 35
college baseball teams each spring.
With soccer, lacrosse, softball and
field hockey facilities as well, the
complex drives a steady stream
of visitors, attracting millions of
outside dollars.
Seeing the revenue flow from
events is easy. Recognizing the
broader concept of " urban parks
tourism " is not. That's where some
park advocates accuse tourism
officials of myopia.
" If we got credit for bringing
in visitors and maybe even for
bringing in some new residents,
we would promote our parks to
out-of-towners, " says Oklahoma
City
Park
and
Recreation
Department spokeswoman Jennifer
McClintock. As it is, " we won't
spend money to market programs
that are free, since there's no
return on that investment. " Even
in the city's marquee parks, like
Myriad Botanical Gardens and the
Oklahoma City Zoo, programming
and marketing efforts are aimed
more toward the local population
than out-of-town visitors.

It's a vicious cycle. The park
department is underfunded; it doesn't
have resources to undertake publicity;
it doesn't do promotion, even for its
premier park; tourists don't know
about it and don't ask; the tourism
agency focuses on other icons of
the city; the parks are perceived by
politicians as having no economic
multiplier effect; and the department
remains underfunded.
While
the
park
advocacy
community repeats clichés like " You
can't have a great city without great

parks, " that rhetoric is ineffective
without hard facts, and those facts
then need to be driven home to
elected officials through the political
process. One of the strongest pieces
of factual information missing from
the debate concerns the costs and
benefits of park visitors.
Peter Harnik is the Director (peter.harnik@
tpl.org) and Abby Martin is Research
Coordinator (abby.martin@tpl.org) of the
Center for City Park Excellence at the Trust for
Public Land. Additional research for this
study was conducted by Katrina Flora.

Comparison of Yearly Park Spending,
Resident vs. Daytime Urbanite,
Select Cities
City

Spending per
Resident

Spending per
Daytime Urbanite

Albuquerque, NM

$59

$52

Anaheim, CA

$65

$48

Charlotte, NC

$65

$42

Chicago, IL

$170

$145

Dallas, TX

$62

$48

El Paso, TX

$39

$38

Glendale, AZ

$53

$59

Indianapolis, IN

$24

$19

Irvine, CA

$210

$131

Jacksonville, FL

$36

$32

Las Vegas, NV

$139

$100

Lexington, KY

$80

$69

Louisville, KY

$84

$60

Lubbock, TX

$44

$42

Miami, FL

$74

$43

Nashville, TN

$66

$52

New York, NY

$191

$170

Omaha, NE

$75

$58

Philadelphia, PA

$72

$64

Plano, TX

$126

$111

San Antonio, TX

$53

$45

San Diego, CA

$109

$89

San Francisco, CA

$208

$152

Tucson, AZ

$95

$82

Washington, DC

$294

$144

W W W. N R PA . O R G | M AY 2 0 1 4 |

Parks & Recreation

53
May 2014 - Parks & Recreation

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of May 2014 - Parks & Recreation
