September 2011 - Parks & Recreation - 12

E D ITO R'S LETTER

Parks and Recreation for All

s PARKS & RECREATION goes to Press, the country has received another

round of bad economic news-a weakening global economy and a gyrating U.S. stock market. With the historic debt ceiling vote behind us (but not
the details), the picture for the parks and recreation field appears far from certain. We
do know, however, federal monies for state and local governments can be expected to
drop off significantly in the coming years. And when federal funds dry up, the consequences invariably pass on to states and localities. Many agencies are already anticipating this. Perhaps this is because they've learned from past down cycles or because
they've shifted their philosophical stances on revenue sources. Numerous agencies
have developed strategies incorporating dedicated sources of funding, partnerships,
sponsorships, and programs based on fees and charges to cover operating costs.
It's this last remedy that our cover story this month addresses. Sound as the fees and
charges approach is, it's good to remember that no approach is without its drawbacks.
As more and more agencies rely on user fees, it
will become increasingly important to ensure that economically disadvantaged individuals and families
are not priced out of what used to be free or inexpensive benefits of living in their chosen communities.
You will read that many agencies account for this in
a number of ways-scholarships, reduced fees, and
more. Some park agencies work with schools and social services agencies to identify those in need and
then reach out to them. This works to the extent that
few people fall through the community cracks. On
the other hand, with unemployment and " underemployment " over the 10 percent level in many parts of
the country, another subset of community members
could easily get overlooked. Furthermore, the needy
won't always come forward to be counted for fear of
being stigmatized. Nor are undocumented residents
likely to avail themselves of such community largess.

This is not an argument against charging for services. Rather, it's a call to consider the model in ways
that foster administrative solvency while assuring
parks and recreation for all. That's no small or theoretical consideration. It can easily be argued that
those who most need the benefits of parks and recreation are not always those in the best position to pay
for them. Hunger, crime, truancy, obesity, and mental
health issues tend to concentrate among those least
able to fend it them off. That's why parks and recreation need to be made easily available for everyone, regardless of how they are paid for. If that means
working harder to increase overall participation-
and revenue-so be it. As Phil Ginsburg of San Francisco's parks and recreation department succinctly
assesses the situation in our cover story, " Every dollar generated in revenues is a dollar we can provide
in services. "

Philip hayward
editor

Parks & Recreation

SEPTEMBER 2011

www.NRPA .ORG

September 2011 - Parks & Recreation

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of September 2011 - Parks & Recreation