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