HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-07-06 - MinutesMEMBERS PRESENT: STAFF: GUESTS: - MINUTES: BUSINESS II. FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT 113 W. MOUNTAIN 72701 (501) 521-7700 PRAB REGULAR MEETING July 6, 1987 The Regular Meeting of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board came to order at 5:05 p.m., Room 326, City Hall. Colwell, Lashley, Clark, Edmonston, Lucas, Melton, Ryan, Waite, Yarbrough, York Reid, Speck Hesnzelmann, House, Norbash Minutes of the June 15, 1987 PRAB Meeting were approved. PUBLIC RELATIONS COMMITTEE LUCAS Lucas, Edmonston, and Tracey Metzger will meet Thursday, July 9, at 2:00 p.m., at the Open Channel Building, to investigate 15-30 minute TV programs which will feature various Fayetteville City Parks. The intended use for these programs will be for commercials, civic and various group presentations. GREEN SPACE - EDMONSTON Developer: Park District: Location: Single Family Units: Green Space Land Requirement Green Space Money in Lieu: Sam Mathias North East Park District Elmwood Drive off Old Wire Road 15 Single Family Units .18 Acres $1,575 MOTION: Lucas/Lashley PRAB makes the recommendation to accept money in lieu of a land dedication for the Green Space requirement in the Hillside Subdivision. Motion passed unanimously. '(8-0) SOCCER FIELDS - NORBASH Assistant City Engineer Norbash presented the re -designed plans for the soccer fields. Due to the 1987 budget cuts, theconsensus of PRAB was that Field No. 3 should be pro- ceeded with, since that field required less cut and fill for the drainage ditch, and engineering should run just a little over $14,000.00. FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT 113 W. MOUNTAIN 72701 (501) 521-7700 k B A_B. REGULAR MF.FTING — July 6, 1987 Page 2 SOCCER FIELDS Continued Estimated .cost of irrigation is $7:,500 per field. It will. be necessary. to cross the creek and blast rock to get a line to 120' inside the fields. A specific request.to City Board, regarding the neces- sity:.of irrigation. for. the .Soccer Fields, will be made for Budget Year 1988. Heinzelmann and..House expressed their appreciation to PRAB and .Norbash. for their cooperation for present and future Soccer Field planning. GREEN SPACE CONTRIBUTIONS EDMONS.TON Green. Space :contributions,. totaling $35:,574.16, including $6,664 accumulated interest, have been received. These contribution figures are broken .down as follows: South East South West .North East North. West District: District: District: District: $.;:2,060.00 $.2,820.00 $11.,541.42 $12,488..33 SPECIAL NOTE: Lashley will help apportion interest to .the correct. four park districts, pursuant to the Green Space Ordinance. POWELL PROPERTY PRAR discussed the. .Powell property which .consists of ten to twelve acres off Appleby .Road which .could be .considered for a parkin the .North East Park District. MOTION-' Lashley/Melton PRAB authorizes C1'ark._to visit. with Mrs.' .Powell to negotiate.future' park:.:poss'ibilitie's.at the Powell property on App'1'eby':Road. Motion passed unanimously. '('8=0) VI.. GULLEY PROPERTY Colwell There was discussion the Gulley property, District, for future about the possibility of acquiring which is in the North West Park Park use. PRAB requested Colwell to investigate this property. VII. VIII. MEETING ADJOURNED: MINUTES APPROVED: FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT 113 W. MOUNTAIN 72701 (501) 521-7700 PRAB REGULAR MEETING - July 6, 1987 Page 3 JUNE CITY POOL REPORT - Edmonston See attached report. JUNE RECREATION PARTICIPATION SUMMARY - EDMONSTON See attached report. 6:20 p.m. /97% Helen J. Secretar J 1987 FAYETTEVILLE CITY POOL MONTHLY SUMMARY F 0 R MONTH OF JUNE 1984 1985. 1986 1987 f'OTAL ATTENDANCE 13,562 10,533 10,491 11,509 Average Daily Attendance 452 " '.351.1 403.5 383.63 Average Saturday 461 410.2 509.6 445.25. Average Sunday 3S6 505.6 445.6 412.50 Average Weekend 42S' 459. 477.6 428.88 Highest Daily Attendance R24 .. .639 6.60_ . 68S Thurs;"6_14 Wed' 6=28 Tues 6=17 Wed 6-17 Pool Office Revenues $ 14,890.22 15,484.14 16,028.55 16,061.00 Concession Revenues $ 4,444.70 Unavailable 4,017.51 5,648.89 Total Hours Open Unavailable 194 173 236 Full Days Closed Unavailable -0- 4 -0- Hours Closed Early .. Unavailable' =0=. -0- 11 Staff Hours Unavailable' 2;710:0 1;927.0 ' 2,551.25 Staff Hours Per Hour Open Unavailable 13:9 11:1 10.81 User Percentages Mom and Tot 11..E 3 " % 1,136-10:8% 813-7.1% Preschool 5 % . 5 .%. 470_ 4.5% 485-4.2% Grade School 37 '8 37 % 3',871 36'.9%4,577-37.7% Adult 12 8 13 % 1,034 9.8%1,278=31.]% Child Passes 10 "% ''10 %. 2,820.26:8%3,132-27.2i Adult Passes 25 % 31 %' 1,200 11:481,245-10.& Chemical Usage 1987 Gas Chlorine 1987 First' Year Records Kept 1;048 lbs Granular Chlorine 1987'First Year Records Kept 175 lbs Aluminum' Sulfate 1987 First' Year Records Kept 40'lbs Soda Ash- 1987 First' Year Records Kept 1;730 lbs Sodium Bicarbonate 1987 First Year Records Kept 0 lbs ### 3 PARTICIPATION 'REPORT FOR MONTH OF JUNE SESSION I Tennis .10 -Wk Swim Team Swim Lessons 2 -Wk Karate -10 -Wk ' Judo - 10 -Wk Youth Theatre 5 -Wk Day Camp -2 -Wk Gymnastics 2 -Wk Tiny Tot Gym 5 -Wk Baton -- 5 -Wk Dance 5 -Wk Softball -Girls 3 Mos 58 65 436 42 24 16 59 45 34 3 10 305 • 1987 SESSION II Swim Lessons .2 -Wk 460 Day Camp - 2 -Wk 60 Gymnastics -2 -Week 34 Baton 5 -Wk • r , . 1_� �o - la 49 O. c.,R Oma. O., .. QE‘._ .. .- - -z. _ea - i. � o ... ' . J--- - - 1 1 'M � (NC' 'V`4 ..� J` Ri RLLI V 4 - \ ,peri EinR1 J U �. Q �� �� 5 JJ x°61 J_ 1 IQ1 en --s..1 c, -'12a wx ��' °o Ch 'tic I- C411 I COO to P phi CS' 4�/-y; f W V�V/; 1 I 1 QJ' I t-- L.01 I . I I 1 r tiv 11 • 0 •• XI E o 0 0 l • T `� i� , a b -z . cs ci hl hL\ 1� ; - `1‘: O ---% 4j c R Q 9 •i \ -.4:: �- iisv .'4 'e . 14t -, �b� a �% :-'� ,a .. gym' i te :111, ;� '4-i 1 M w e • a&o ;_ .0 •° ° _te- 1 6 ' �`�.. fltd CN ; ,ao- a 1 C ` ,r 1t f1 \t'c5 ' : m \ * c . (f: : $ ty i `/- :moi tC g c-,„� \ \r oc O r ai -I Q6� •.r cel CO . p+a i ni IN I�iC G� P o_iJ. Vt 1 1 I 9 0` ,acs .0:. 1-� .9 ...`c �� -•:-) �1-)L0L '.gip • mM Ito `� ,A •1/4no cfr p�-'tic Gl: C, -i' 1 �i -0 jN 1 [t � -L�11 ' - i j U I o`- Cr 0 CITY OF eggd June 25, 1987 P.O. BOX 4398 411 W. 8TH ODESSA, TEXAS 79760-4398 (915) 337-7381 As you requested, the following is a completed compilation of results of the Odessa, Texas Parks and Recreation Department's February 1987 survey of cities throughout the United States. One hundred twenty cities were mailed questionnaires and a total of fifty cities responded. The survey questioned many items concerning the affairs of parks and recreation departments including population, numbers of acres in the system, department budgets, size of staffs, numbers of community centers, athletic fields and swimming pools. Also surveyed were capital improvement budgets, numbers of recreation personnel and many other areas of concern in the parks and recreation system. The following tabulations highlight the Odessa, Texas Parks and Recreation operations, (which, as we expected, fared rather poorly), but the criteria results and the tables that follow>Nhopefully, will give you some insight as to where your operation stands among other systems surveyed. Again, thank you for your very generous cooperation in our effort. J City 1. Florence, Alabama 2. Talladega, Alabama 3. Fayetteville, Arkansas 4. Scottsdale, Arizona 5. Tucson, Arizona 6. Los Gatos, California 7. Mill Valley, California 8. Morgan Hill, California 9. San Bernadino, California 10. San Jose, California 11. Ft. Collins,•Colorado 12. Boulder, Colorado 13. Longmont, Colorado 14. Orlando, Florida 15. Tallahassee, Florida 16. Junction City, Kansas 17. Salinas, Kansas X18. Topeka, Kansas 49. Lake Charles, Louisiana 20. Dearborn, Michigan 21. Duluth, Minnesota 22. Billings, Montana 23. Meridian, Mississippi 24. St. Joseph, Missouri 25. Grand Island, Nebraska 26. Reno, Nevada RESPONDING CITIES Population 39,000 20,000 40,000 108,447 390,000 26,900 13,000 20,000 130,000 728,000 85,000 86,000 50,000 152,000 121,640 20,000 42,000 125,000 77,000 90,000 92,811 85,000 48,000 78,000 40,000 115,000 City Population 27. Las Cruces, New Mexico 28. Winston-Salem, N. C. 29. Clarksville, Tennessee 30. Abilene, Texas 31. Amarillo, Texas 32. Arlington, Texas 33. Baytown, Texas 34. El Paso, Texas 35. Grand Prairie, Texas 36. Irving, Texas 37. Lubbock, Texas 38. Mesquite, Texas 39. Odessa, Texas 40. Wichita Falls, Texas 41. Provo, Utah 42. South Burlington, Vermont 43. Norfolk, Virginia 44. Roanoke, Virginia 45. Bellevue, Washington 46. Charleston, West Virginia 47. 'Morgantown, West Virginia 48. Eau Claire, Wisconsin 49. Green Bay, Wisconsin 50. Racine, Wisconsin 51. Cheyenne, Wyoming 50,000 140,000 63,000 100,000 150,000 255,000 60,000 475,000 94,000 150,000 200,000 100,000 100,000 101,000 81,000 12,000 266,979 101,000 80,000 64,000 27,000 56,000 93,942 87,000 50,000 SURVEY RESULTS Criteria 111 measured the surveyed cities' number of acres per 100 people. It is nationally accepted that the ideal ratio is one acre per 10U people. Odessa fell number 46 among the 50 results with 4/10 of an acre per 100 Odessa residents. We best place to liveas far as.acreage per 160 gitizens is Fayetteville, Arkansas with 6.74 _acres per 100_people. The worst As Charleston, West Virginia with .16 acre per 100 people. the average per 4`UU people of the 50 cities in the survey was 1.32 acrea'per AO people. The median was 1.04 acres per 100 people. Criteria 112 measured what each taxpayer paid anuually'for the services of the parks and recreation departments. Odessa fared number 49 of 50 who responded to this question. The highest reported tax dollar to parks and recreation was Los Gatos, California at $93.64 per person and the lowest was Lake Charles, Louisiana with $12.68 per person. Odessa's per capita tax for parks and recreation is $13.00 annually. The average per person tax for parks and recreation was $36.24, the median was $30.50. Criteria 113 dealt with the amount of money each taxpayer contributed to park maintenance, that is,_dollars that we earmarked for the upkeep of parks and equipment. Thin did not include recreation monies. Odessa was number 41 of 48 reporting. The average contribution was $25.16, the median was $19.67. The highest contribution of any city toward park maintenance was $93.64 in Los Gatos, California and the lowest was South Burlington, Vermont at $4.96. Odessa's contribution is $11.61. Criteria p4 measured the recreation budget contribution per person. Of the 47 responses, Odessa was number 44 with a total annual taxpayer contribu- tion of $2.39. The number one slot was Held by Winston-Salem, North Carolina with a contribution of $44.28 per taxpayer. 'the least amount contributed was at Grand Leland, Nebraska with a total of $ .88 per person. The average tax contribution to recreation was $13.21 and the median was $10.11 per capita. Criteria 05 measured.the percentage of the total percentage of the parks and recreation budget to the capital improvement budget; that is, how does the capital improvement total budget compare with the total operating budget? Of the 51 cities in the survey, 40 responded. Odessa surveyed as number 26 of 40 responses at 13.46 percent. The highest response was 87.09 percent from Bellevue, Washington. The lowest was 2.17 percent from South Burlington, Vermont. The average percentage of capital dollars per parks and recreation budget was 28.25 percent. The median was 21 percent. Criteria 06 measures the number of dollars each city spends on seasonal maintenance staff. 'Phis is a good measure of a city's support of a park division's high season. The criteria was based on the total amount of dollars for seasonal help per acre. There were a total of 36 responses on this item. Odessa ranked number 14 of 36. The highest seasonal dollar was spent at Baytown, Texas at $1,874. Odessa's per acre dollar for seasonals came in at $208. The lowest response was $14 at Lubbock., Texas. The average per acre seasonal dollar was $302.59 per acre and the median was $170. Criteria 07 represents capital improvement dollars to population; that is, how many dollars does each citizen contribute to capital improvements in the parks and recreation department? Assumptions are made here that ratios of. total populations to actual taxpayers are uniform across the country. There were 41 responses on this item. In this criteria, Odessa ranked 3U with $2.75 per person. The highest ranking city was Bellevue, Washington with $67.50 per person and the lowest was Provo, Utah with $ .42 per person. T1ie average dollar per person was $10.74 and the median was $6.47. Criteria 118 computed the number ofpeople served per staff programmer in recreation, with the ideal situation being a lower ratio of citizens to programmer. There were 46 cities responding. Odessa ranked number 42 among 46 with 50,000 citizens. The best ratio Was found in Orlando, Florida with 2,026 citizens per programer and the worst was found in Winston-Salem, North Carolina with 140,000 people per progranmer. The average number of persons per programmer was 21,242 and the median was 9,579. Criteria 119 compared the percentages of parks and recreation budgets to total city budgets. There were 50 responses of 51 surveys received. Odessa ranked number 42 of 50 with a percentage of 2.9 percent of total city budget. The highest percentage recorded belonged to Los Gatos, California with 23.1 percent, and the lowest recorded was 1.9 percent at Grand Island, Nebraska. The average percentage was 6.8 percent and the median was 6.5 percent. It may be noted here that Odessa's park division represents approximately 3 percent of the city's total budget, and the recreation division represents one-half of one percent of the total city budget. Criteria 010 represents the number of people served by pools in the surveyed cities. The number of pools reported was divided into the popula- tion of each city. There were 43 total responses. Odessa ranked number 16 with 20,O0U citizens per pool. The number one ranked city was Junction City, Kansas with 4,000 per pool, and number 43 was Wichita Falls, Texas with 101,000 per pool_. The average number of people per pool was 25,626. The median.was 24,328 people per pool. Criteria 1111 represents the number of people served by community buildings. There were 48 responses. Odessa was ranked number 16 with nine community buildings, representing 11,111 people per building. The highest ratio belonged to Dearborn, Michigan with 90,000 citizens per building and the lowest ratio was Duluth, Minnesota with 1,600 people per building. The average number of people per building was 19,744. The median was 14,500. Criteria 1112 measured the number of people per capita per lighted athletic field. A total of 41 cities responded. Odessa ranked number 19 with 5,000 citizens per field. The best ratio belonged to Talladega, Alabama with 1,666 people per field. The worst ratio belonged to San Jose, California with 52,000 people per field. The average was 9,023 and the median was 6,666. Other Observations Forty of the fifty-one responding cities had at least one public golf course. Most had two or more. Forty-one of the responding cities used volunteers on an extensive basis for programming. Odessa uses very few. Of the fifty-one cities surveyed, forty-four operated their own adult softball leagues. Overall Ranking Overall, Odessa ranked number 47 of 51 cities surveyed, with an average of 26.50 points. The city with the best overall score was Mill Valley, California with an average score of 7.11. The worst score was Provo, Utah with an average score of 33.78. The overall average point was 20.10 and the median was 19.43. The overall ranking was derived by averaging the rankings of each criteria for each city. CRITERIA A1: ACRES TO POPULATION City Acres per 100 j j, +A1yet teville r-ArkansasJ n..-r..+r..->r._..•:..v...v.+^;'r.-'6,.74 \Boulder, Colorado 5.38 )Longmont, Colorado 4.10 4. Scottsdale, Arizona 2.20 5. Winston-Salem, North Carolina 2.14 6. St. Joseph, Missouri 1.99 7. Billings, Montana 1.88 8. Green Bay, Wisconsin 1.70 9. Lubbock, Texas 1.64 0. Junction City, Kansas 2.00 1. Salinas, Kansas 1.50 2. Bellevue, Washington 1.50 3. Roanoke, Virginia 1.49 4. Florence, Alabama 1.49 5. Las Cruces, New Hexico 1.47 6. South Burlington, Vermont 1.46 7. Grand Prairie, Texas 1.45 8. Meridian, Mississippi 1.45 9. Amarillo, Texas 1.41 U. Hill Valley, California 1.40 1. Racine, Wisconsin 1.27 2. Topeka, Kansas 1.20 3. Wichita Falls, Texas 1.09 4. Eau Claire, Wisconsin 1.07 5. Dearborn, Michigan 1.07 '.6. Morgantown, West Virginia 1.04 17. Clarksville, Tennessee.. 1.03 1. Mesquite, Texas 1.01 1. Abilene, Texas 1.00 10. Cheyenne, Wyoming 1.00 11. Tallahassee, Florida .86 12. Tucson, Arizona , .85 13. Baytown, Texas .83 14. Orlando, Florida .82 IC Duluth, Minnesota .82 }Fort Collins, Colorado .75 1,.- Talladega, Alabama .75 18. Grand Island, Nebraska .69 1. 'Irving, Texas .66 4). Arlington, Texas .65 il. Reno, Nevada .59 12. Lake Charles, Louisiana .58 13. Los Gatos, California .57 14. Horgan Hill, California .50 15. San Bernadino, California .50 16.1';ODESSA;^TERAS izartronnatunlf?irinwidi?.1Tt%r,'r: j<7jlS40 Jr. 17. Provo, Utah .40 .8. El Paso, Texas .36 i9. Norfolk, Virginia .23 i0. Charleston, West Virginia .16 CRITERIA 12: PARKS 6 RECREATION BUDGET TO POPULATION City $ per Person 1. Los Gatos, California $ 93.64 2. Scottsdale, Arizona 90.53 3. Winston-Salem, North Carolina 85.71 4. Bellevue, Washington 77.50 5. Hill Valley, California 68.17 6. Boulder, Colorado • 62.79 7. Orlando, Florida 59.21 8. Eau Claire, Wisconsin 51.79 9. Topeka, Kansas 50.40 10. Racine, Wisconsin 49.43 11. Green Bay, Wisconsin 48.93 12. Norfolk, Virginia 48.35 13. Longmont, Colorado 45.24 14. Fort Collins, Colorado 44.81 15. Tucson, Arizona 43.20 16. Tallahassee, Florida 41.24 17. Dearborn, Michigan 37.56 1B. Grand Prairie, Texas 37.23 19. Morgantown, West Virginia. 37.10 20. Florence, Alabama 35.90 21. Cheyenne, Wyoming _ 34.00 22. Irving, Texas - 32.72 23. Talladega, Alabama 32.50 24. San Bernadino, California 31.54 25. Meridian, Mississippi 31.25 26. San Jose, California 30.96 27. Horgan Hill, California 30.50 2B. Las Cruces, New Mexico 28.82 29. Lubbock, Texas 28.77 30. Baytown, Texas 27.33 31. Roanoke, Virginia 26.73 32. Mesquite, Texas 26.21 33. Charleston, West Virginia 25.14 34. Abilene, Texas 24.97 d5;-'sWayeUnlike lilrkaasaso "::-x erwr: 140.14 36. Ararillo, Texas 24.16 37. Arlington, Texas 21.41 38.' Wichita Falls, Texas 20.79 39. Reno, Nevada 20.57 40. Junction City, Kansan 20.00 41. Provo, Utah 19.75 42. Billings, Montana 19.71 43. South Burlington, Vermont 19.15 44. Duluth, Minnesota 17.66 45. St. Joseph, Missouri 15.38 46. Salinas, Kansas 14.88 47. El Paso, Texas 14.74 48. Grand Island, Nebraska. 13.13 49.:1 ODESSA,iIEXAS.-AWdiig.WIi :0AcIt::i::f:.113.00 50. Lake Charles,. Louisiana .12.68 • • CRITERIA /3: PARK MAINTENANCE BUDGET TO POPULATION Park Maintenance $ per Person City )1. Los Gatos, California 2. Scottsdale, Arizona 3. Bellevue, Washington. 4. Eau Claire. Wisconsin 5. Green Bay, Wisconsin 6. Racine, Wisconsin 7. Winston-Salem, North Carolina 8. Orlando, Florida' 9. Norfolk, Virginia 10. Hill Valley, California 11. Boulder, Colorado 12. Tucson, Arizona 13. Tallahassee, Florida 14. Longmont, Colorado 15. Morgantown. West Virginia 16. Meridian, Mississippi 17: Las Cruces, New Mexico 18. Cheyenne, Wyoming 19. Tucson, Arizona 2U. Florence, Alabama 21. San Bernadino, California 22. Amarillo, Texas 23. Ft. Collin'', Colorado 24. Baytown, Texas 25. Lubbock, Texas 26. San Jose, California 27. Dearborn, Michigan 28. Provo, Texas 29. Wichita Falls. Texas 30. Roanoke, Virginia 31. Mesquite, Texas 32. Abilene, Texas 33. Reno, Nevada 134. Grand Prairie, Texas i35. Horgan Hill, California 312. Arlington, Texas 37. Grand Island, Nebraska 38. El Paso, Texas 39. Junction City, Kansas IMPre- rYayetteviile ,'rAtkansas' 11:ia ODESSA,"TEKAS 't's�++` er 42. Billings, Montana 43. Duluth, Minnesota 44. Charleston. West Virginia 45. Talladega, Alabama 46. St. Joseph, Missouri 47. Salinas, Kansas 48. South Burlington, Vermont $ 93.64 68.31 57.50 51.79 43.44 42.96 41.43 39.47 38.24 38.18 32.56 32.30 31.36 29.92 29.58 29.21 28.82 28.10 27.20 25.64 22.31 20.99 20.22 19.67 19.37 19.19 18.04 17.40 16.45 15.84 15.59 15.38 14.79 13.83 12.50 12.35 12.25 12.21 12.00 race.. -:.ii' S4 . .�.+-y^.,T...2. 11.61 n. 10.89 10 62 10.59 10.00 9.62 7.44 4.96 CRITERIA 04: RECREATION BUDGET TO POPULATION City Recreation $ per Person 1. Winston-Salem, North Carolina $ 44.28 2. Boulder, Colorado 30.23 3. Hill Valley, California 29.99 4. Grand Prairie, Texas 23.40 5. Topeka, Kansas 23.20 6. Talladega, Alabama 22.50 7. Scottsdale, Arizona 22.22 8. Bellevue, Washington 20.00 9. Orlando, Florida 19.74. 10. Dearborn, Michigan 19.52 11. Horgan Hill, California 18.00 12. Clarksville, Tennessee 16.66 13. Longmont, Colorado 15.32 14. Charleston, West Virginia 14.55 15. South Burlington, Vermont 14.19 em/6.--'Fay flies Arkansas:- 's'1.13 00 17. Lake Charles, Louisiana 12.68 18. Ft. Collins, Colorado 11.87 19. San Jose, California 11.77 20. Tucson, Arizona 10.90 21. Roanoke, Virginia . 10.89 22. Mesquite, Texas 10.62 23. Florence, Alabama 10.26 24. Norfolk, Virginia 10.11 25. Tallahassee, Florida 9.88 26. Abilene, Texas .9.59 27. Lubbock, Texas .9.40 28. San Bernadino, California 9.23 29. Arlington. Texas 9.06 3U. Billings, Montana 8.82 31. Junction City, Kansas 8.00 32. Baytown, Texas 7.66 33. Morgantown, West Virginia 7.52 34. Salinas, Kansas 7.44 35. Duluth, Minnesota 7.04 36. Racine, Wisconsin 6.65 37. Cheyenne, Wyoming 5.90 38. 'Reno, Nevada 5.78 39. St. Joseph, Missouri 5.77 40. Green Bay, Wisconsin 5.49 41. Wichita Falls, Texas 4.34 42. Amarillo, Texas 3.17 43. El Paso, Texas 2.53 44.7.ODESSA; OPERAS 'T i .::::___ s_::_'i. , ....u'y'...2.39 .'J:1 45. Provo, Utah 2.53 46. Meridian, Mississippi 2.04 47. Grand Island, Nebraska .88 [ERLA 15: CAPITAL 110•RUVI:IIENT BUDGET TO PARD BUDGET • 2 Capital Budget to YARD Budget Bellevue, Washington Lubbock. Texas Tucson, Arizona Orlando, Texas' Son Bernediuo, Gatifornin Cherlenton. Went Virginia Arlington, Texas , Irving, Texan St. Joseph, Missouri ▪ Mesquite, Twine • Ft. Colllon, Colorado • Duluth. Minnesota • Hill Volley, CalifornIn ▪ Vinod Prairie, Texas ▪ Billings. Montana • Salinas, Kn„ens F▪ .1 Popo. Texne • Boulder, Colorado ▪ Amarillo, Texas • Topeka, Kettnne ▪ Cheyenne. Wyoming • Longmont, Colorado . Tellnhnneee, Florida • Ileridino, Mississippi Bnytown. 'Texne .," OIIESSA," TEXAS ▪ Winston-Solem, North Carolina i; ---y„ yettev111e.,Arkanees Wichitn Falls, Texas 1. Green Roy, Winconnhtt Tnllndege, Al/Anima ,. \Norfolk, Virgioin :pm Claire, Wisconsin 1.,Ann Cruces, New Mexico 5. Crowd Inland, Nebraska 5. Florence, Alnbmmm 7, Itncitte. Wiscouains 8. .Abilene. Texan 9. Scottednle, Arizoun U . South Burlington, Vermont 87.09% 83.36% 78.007• 66.66% 61.5U% 57.93% 57.042 51.002 46.5U% 45.22%. 41.57% 39.96% 39.70% 34.29% 32.83% 28.00% 25.71% 25.107. 23.55% 21.00% 17.64% 17.10% 16.702 15.047. .14.002 x'"13.46% :•13.007. •10:57%' 9.52%. 9.00% 7.707. 7.672 7.207. • 5.852 4.572 4.002 3.35% 2.60% 2.40% 2.172 CRITERIA 16: MI0U111' OF SEASONAL STAFF TU 'IOTA% ACREAGE City 1. Baytown, Maas • 2. Longmont, Colorado 3. Racine, Wisconsin 4. Morgnntowu, West Virginia 5. San Bernadine., Coll -Corals 6. T'nllohansee• Floridn 7• Bellevue, Washington 8. Topeka, Knnens 9. Scottsdale. Arizona 1U• 111111nge, Montano 11• Ft. Collins, Colorado 12. Arlington, Texas ' 13. Meridian, Mina. s...... .. _r .. 14. 'ODESSA, TEXAS... 15. Amarillo, Texas 16. Eno Claire, Wisconsin 17. Los Gntos, California 18. Abilene, Texne 19. L•'1 Paso, Texas 20. Florence, Alabama 21• Duluth, Minnesota 22. Cheyenne, Wyoming 23. Roanoke, Virginia 24. Reno, Nevada 25. 1.0e Cruces, New Mexico 26. Lnke Chorine. Louisiana 27. Norgnn 1111, California 28. Mesquite, Texne 29. Tnllndegn• Alabama 30. Wichita -Falls. Texas 31• t;rand lsl nod• Nebraska 32. St. Joseph, Missouri 33. Snlinna, Knneaa 34. Winston-Salem, North Carolina 35. Junction City, Kansas 36. Lubbock, Texas $ per Acre for Seasonal Stall $ 1,874 1,626 672 645 565 537 417 4UU 375 344 324. 253 218 .... 208. 206 186 170 170 168 166 163 130 127 125 105 100 95 94 80 77 73 65 63 33 25 14 CRITERIA 17: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET TO POPULATION City 1. Bellevue, Washington 2. Orlando, Florida 3. Tucson, Arizona 4. Hill Valley, California 5. Lubbock, Texas 6. San Bernardino, California 7. Ft. Conine, Colorado 8. Irving, Texas 9. Boulder, Colorado 10. Charleston, West Virginia 11. Grand Leland, Nebraska, 12. Grand Prairie, Texas 13. Arlington, Texas 14. Mesquite,'Texas 15. Winston-Salem, North Carolina 16. Topeka, Kansas 17. Longmont, Colorado 18. St. Joseph, Missouri 19. Duluth, Minnesota 20. Tallahassee, Florida 21. Billings, Montana 22. Cheyenne, Wyoming 23. Amarillo, Texas 24. Meridian, MioeisalpPt, 25. Green Bay, Wisconsin 26. Salinas, Kansas 27. El Paso, Texas 28. Eau Claire, Wisconsin 29. Norfolk, Virginia s .r"t'r'1=C�a::+;;oa�2.75 'g7! -?O."SUOESSA:kTE)UL4 .ta!**Y.. .Si=.L 4 �.-rCwr '."2:63 T^%inyettas•il:kar,��•�Arkanaat"=�x''�^'i^'�"' 2.50 ,2. Talladega, Alabamn 2.19 33. Scottsdale, Arizona 1.98 34. Wichita Falls. Texas 1.98 35. Baytown, Texas 1.69 36. Lae Cruces, Nev Mexico 37. Racine, Wisconsin 38. Clarksville, Tennessee 39. Florence, Alabama 40. Abilene, Texas 41. Provo, Utah $ per Person $67.50 39.47 33.96 27.00 23.99 19.39 18.63 16.67 15.76 14.56 13.13 12.77 12.22 11.85 10.71 10.40 7.72 7.15 7.06 6.89 6.47 6.00 5.69 4.70 4.58 4.17 3.79 3.73 3.71 1.66 1.30 1.28 .64 .42 CRITERIA 18: NUMBER Of RECREATION PROGRAIDIERS TO POPULATIOII City 1. Orlando, Florida 2. Duluth, Minnesota 3. Tucson, Arizona 4. Charleston, West Virginia 5. Grand Prairie, Texas 6. Hill Valley, California 7. Roanoke, Virginia 8. Tallahassee, Florida. 9. Meridian, Mississippi 10. Scottsdale, Arizona 11. Florence, Alabama 12. South'Burlington, Vermont 13. Mesquite, Texas 14. Racine, Wisconsin 15. Las Cruces. New Mexico 16. Cheyenne, Wyoming 17. Boulder, Colorado 18. San Bernardino, California 19. Salinas. Kansas 20. Irving, Texas 21. Bellevue, Washington 22. Morgantown, West Virginia 23. San Jose, California 24. Lubbock, Texas 25. Longmont. Colorado 26. Topeka, Kansas 27. Clarksville, Tenneasee 28. Dearborn, Michigan 29. Eau Claire, Wisconsin 30. St. Joseph, Missouri 31. Charleston. West Virginia 32. Horgan 11111, California f33,•.- Eayetteville i zArkaawre,- , 34. Billings, Montana 35. Reno, Nevada 36. Wichita Falls, Texas 37. Arlington, Texas 38. Norfolk, Virginia 39. Baytown, Texas 40. Green Bay, Wisconsin 41. Amarillo, Texas F -42.-5 ODESSA.-TEXAS nv ep:T7 y a,. P^n:r 43. Lake Charles, Louisiana 44. Provo, Utah 45. El Paso. Texas 46. Winston-Salem, North Carolina No. Persons per Programmer 2,026 3,093 3,120 3,555 4,087 4,333 4,809 5.289 5,333 5,422 5,571 6,000 6,667 6.692 7,142 7,143 7,167 8.125 8,400 8,824 8,889 9,000 9.579 11,111 12,500 12,500 12,600 12,857 14,000 19.500 20,000 20,000 rwaw- elo.00b 21,250 23,000 25.250 28,333 29,664 30,000 31,314 50,000 'Y Pi.r: ^x7:50.000 Za 77,000 81,000 95,000 140.000 CRITERIA 09: % OF PARD BUDGET TO TOTAL CITY BUDGET 2 of City Budget City 1. Los Gatos, California 2. Talladega, Alabama 3. Florence, Alabama t Virginia 6. Morgantown, g 5. Lubbock, Texas 6. Meridian, Mississippi 7. Winston-Salem, North Carolina 8. Orlando, Florida 9. Cheyenne, Wyoming 10. Green Bay, Wisconsin 11. Mill Valley, California 12. Racine, Wisconsin 13. Roanoke, Virginia 14. Arlington, Texan 15. Boulder, Colorado 16. Mesquite, Texas 17. SanBePmd L,fornia 1B. Eau Claire, Wisconsin 19. Junction City, Kanoas 20. Abilene, Texas 21. Wichita Falls, Texas 22. Topeka, Kansas 23. Dearborn, Michigan 24. South Burlington, Vermont 25. _Scottsdale, 26. Grand,Prairie, Texas 27. Irving. Texas 28. Bellevue, Washington 29. Morgan Hill, California 30. Charleston, West Virginia 31. Baytown, Texas 32. Amarillo, Texas •1 33. Lake Charles, Louisiana 34. El Paso, Texas 35. Tucson, Ari osis 36. Norfolk, R in 37. St. Joseph, Missouri 38. Longmont, Colorado 39. Duluth, Minnesota 4U. Provo, Utah.. may;--FLyettev ills, Amkansas 1427E0DESeA:71EKAS.47..11 i..:7n.s .:__>,__„, 72.92 2.8% 2.7% 2.67. 2.6% 2.52 2.22 2.2% 1.92 23.12 13.02 12.72 12.52 11.8% 10.02 9.97. 9.57. 9.17. 9.07. 8.97. 8.97. 8.87. 8.62 8.32 8.07. 7.5% 7.22 7.12 7.12 6.92 6.9% 6.72 6.6% 6.52 6.4% 5.82 5.72 5.5% 5.22 5.1% 4.72 4.72 4.52 4.1% 3.9% 3.82 3.52 3.5% 3.22 43. Reno, Nevado 44: Ft. Collins, Colorado 45. Las Cruces, New Mexico 46. Tallahassee, Florida 47. Salinas. Kansas 48. Billings, Montana 49. San Jose, California 50. Grand Island, Nebraska CRITERIA 110: TOTAL UUIWER OF POOLS TO POPULATION City Population per Pool 1. Junction City, Kansas 2. Grand Island, Nebraska 3. Dearborn, Michigan 4. Clarksville, Tennessee. 5. Talladega, Alabama 6. Longmont. Colorado 7. Charleston, West Virginia 8. Morgantown, West Virginia 9. Winston-Salem, North Carolina 10. Baytown, Texas 11. Lae Cruces, New Mexico 12. Tucson, Arizona 13. Grand Prairie, Texas ..14. Florence, Alabama 15. San Jose, California `16. J OUESSA;?7'E%Ain"IFFi7?'.''+77=1:r .172.: i'ln.2(1,000 licjeyet taville r Azksaw■ .s,--m-..t.*'°' _"-'20.000 21.000 18. Salinas, Kansas 19. Boulder, Colorado 21,5002,500 20. Green Bay. Wisconsin 24.000 21. Meridian, Mississippi 24.328 22. Tallahaseee, Florida 24.328 23. Cheyenne, Wyoming 25.000 24. Mesquite, Texas 25,000 25. Irving. Texas 25,000 26. Topeka, Kansas 25,333 27. Orlando, Florida 25,666 28. Lake Charles. Louisiana 25,666 29. San Bernardino, California 26,000 30. Tallahassee, Florida 28,333 31. Billings, Montana 28,333 32. Ft. Collins, Colorado 28,333 33. Reno, Nevada 31,875 34. Arlington, Virginia75 33,83 35. Norfolk, Virginia 31, 36. Scottsdale, Arizona 37,50061642 37. Amarillo, Texas 40,000 38. Lubbock, Texas 40.500 39. Provo, Utah 40.500 40. El Paso, Texas 50.000 41. Abilene, Texas 50.000 42. Roanoke, Virginia 101,000 43. Wichita Falls. Texas 4,000 6.666 6,923 9,000 10,000 10,000 12,800 13,500 14,000 15,000 16,666 18.511 18,800 19.500 19,676 CRITERIA 1111: NUMBER OF CODBIUNII'Y City CENTERS TO POPULATION People per Community Center Duluth, Minnesota 2. Talladega, Alabama 3. Los Gatos, California 4. Billings, Montana 5. Hill Valley, California 6. Lake Charles, Louisiana 7. Scottsdale, Arizona 8. Florence, Alabama 9. Meridian, Mississippi 10. Charleston, West Virginia 11 Junction City, Kansas 1,600 3,333 5,380 6,071 6,500 7,700 7,746 7,800 8,000 8,000 10,000 12. Cheyenne, Wyoming 10,000. 13. Winston-Salem, North Carolina 10.000 14. Tallahassee, Florida 10.137 15. Lubbock, Texas 10,526 16.'0B00ESSAT:TFxAS ,,<yr intT 727.1 --O• .'T-:- FiRL-,.11,111 11,122 13,000 13.500 14,000 14,166 14,285 14,444 14.500 15,000 16,000 16,666 17,200 18,667 18,750 18,800 19,000 20,000 20,526 20,833 21.000 23,750 25,000 25.000 25,250 31,314 33,372 38.333 e10,000 40,500 56,000 63,750 17. Roanoke, Virginia 18. St. Joseph, Missouri 19. Morgantown, West Virginia 20. Salinas, Kansas 21. Ft. Collins, Colorado 22. Mesquite, Texas 23. San B;rnadino, California 24. Racine', Wisconsin 25. Baytown, Texas 26. Bellevue, Washington 27. Abilene, Texas 28. Boulder. Colorado 29. San Jose, California 30. Irving, Texas 31. Grand Prairie, Texas 32. Orlando, Florida Horgan 11111, California Tucson, Arizona 35. Topeka, Kannas 36. Clarksville, Tennessee 37. El Paso, Texas 38. Longmont, Colorado . 39. Las Cruces, New Mexico 40. Wichita Falls, Texan 41. Green Bay, Wisconsin 42. Norfolk, Connecticut 43. Reno, Nevada - 444.rfayeeteviile,-Aikansas 45. Provo, Utah 46. Enu Claire, Wisconsin 47. Arlington, Texas CRITERIA /12: NUMBER OF ATHLETIC FIELDS TO POPULATION City• (lumber of People per Field 1. Talladega, Alabama 1,666 2. Junction City, Kansas 1,666 3. Las Cruces, New Mexico 2,777 4. Grand Island, Nebraska 3.072 5t' aFayettevlile, 'Arkansas 3,077 6. Tallahassee, Florida 3,119 7. Florence, Alabama - 3,250 8. Lake Charles, Louisiana ' 3,500 9. Grand Prairie, Texas 3,616 1U. Meridian, Mississippi 3,692 11. St: Joseph. Missouri 3,714 12. Baytown, Texas 4,286 13. San Bernadino, California 4,373 ..14. Wichita Falls, Texas 4,391 15. Abilene, Texas 4,545 16. Roanoke, Virginia 4,590 17. Amarillo, Texas 4,688 18. Mesquite, Texas 4,762 19. Norfolk, Virginia 4,767 20. Clarksville, Tennessee 4,848 21. ",UDESSA,"TE11AS `>.:277.1r':"71r 1; 7.2.: .v a;..5 000 .. 22. Tucson, Arizona - 5,200 23. Bellevue, Washington 5,333 24. Charleston, West Virginia 6,400 25. 'Horgan Mill, California 6,666 26. Lubbock, Texas 6.666 27. Racine, Wisconsin 6,692 28. Salinas, Kansas 7,000 29. Reno, Nevada 7,187 30. Creen Bay, Wisconein 7,226 31. Irving, Texas 7,50U 32. Orlando, Florida 7,600 33. Longmont, Colorado 8,333 34. Cheyenne, Wyoming 8,333 35. Duluth, Minnesota 8,437 36. Ft. Collins, Colorado 8,500 37. Dearborn, Michigan 9,000 38. Scottsdale, Arizona 9037 39. Topeka, Kansas 9,615 40. Arlington, Texas 10,625 4t. Boulder, Colorado 10,750 42. South Burlington, Vermont 12,000 43. Winston-Salem, North Carolina 12,727 44. El Paso, Texas 13,571 45. Eau Claire, Wisconsin 14',000 46. Billings, Montana 17,000 47. Los Gatos, California 26,900 48. Morgantown, West Virginia 27,000 49. Provo. Utah 40,500 50. San Jose, California 52,000 OVERALL RANKING 1. Mill Valley, California 2. Bellevue, Washington 3. Orlando, Florida 4. Los Gatos, California 5. Boulder, Colorado 6. Meridian, Mississippi 7. Grand Prairie, Texas 8. Longmont, Colorado 9. San Bernadino, California 10. Morgantown, West Virginia 11. Lubbock, Texas 12. Tallahassee, Florida 13. Talladega, Alabama 14. Roanoke, Virginia 15. Junction City, Kansas 16. Charleston, West Virginia 17. Racine, Wisconsin 18. Tucson, Arizona 19. Mesquite,Texas 20. Winston-Salem, North Carolina 21. Scottsdale, Amlzona 22. Florence, Alabama 23. Cheyenne, Wyoming 24. Ft. Collins, Colorado 25. Las Cruces, New Mexico 26. Clarksville, Tennessee 27. Topeka, Kansas 28. Eau Claire, Wisconsin 29. Duluth, Minnesota "90: "F ye`t'EeVY3 p; ^Arkansas 31. St. Joseph, Missouri 32. Amarillo, Texas 33. Billings, Montana 34. Lake Charles, Louisiana 35. Arlington, Texas 36. Irving, Texas 37. Morgan Hill, California 38. Abilene, Texas 39. Green Bay, Wisconsin 4U. Norfolk, Virginia 41. Salinas, Kansas 42. Dearborn, Michigan 43. Baytown, Texas 44. Grand Island, Nebraska 45. South Burlington, Vermont .46.._.,.Wich ita , Falls , ..Texas . . ........... 47.ghOOESSA;3TEXAS 48. Reno, Nevada 49. El Paso, Texas 50. San Jose, California 51. Provo, Utah 7.11 10.36 11.91 12.00 12.73 13.33 13.45 15.25 15.67 16.20 16.33 16.42 16.58 17.00. 17.22 17.27 17.36 17.36 17.42 17.58 17.67 17.92 18.17 18.82 19.09 19.43 20.67 21.00 21.27 �T1:27.' 21.83 22.27 22.33 22.78 23.00 23.44 23.67 23.73 23.73 23.91 24.08 24.22 24.83 25.20 25.67 25.83 26.50`,` 29.00 29.83 31.71 33.78