2012 BUDGET LEGISLATION FISCAL NOTE

 

Department:

Contact Person/Phone:

CBO Analyst/Phone:

Parks and Recreation

Korie Voorheis/ 684-4135

Amy Williams/ 233-2651

 

Legislation Title:  AN ORDINANCE relating to the Department of Parks and Recreation; establishing the 2012 fee schedule for the use of park properties and other park and recreation facilities and services; superseding previous park and recreation fee schedules; and amending Section 18.28.010 of the Seattle Municipal Code.

 

Summary of the Legislation: 

 

This legislation establishes the Department of Parks and Recreation’s (DPR’s) Fee Schedule for 2012.

 

Background:

 

 DPR’s fees and charges provide financial support for the operation and maintenance of DPR programs, facilities, and park grounds.  The DPR Fee Schedule transmitted by this legislation includes new or increased fees to address inflation and improved cost recovery in 2012.

 

The revenue generated by these fees constitutes approximately 10 % of the funding used for operating and maintaining Parks facilities, excluding revenue associated with the Golf Program, which is addressed in Ordinance 121351.  All fees collected from DPR activities and concessions are used exclusively for Parks facilities, with the exception of fees related to the Joint Athletic Field Use Agreement between the City of Seattle and Seattle Public Schools (SPS).  The City schedules and collects fees for the use of both City and SPS athletic fields, and retains a portion of SPS’s field fees to recover administrative costs.  The appropriate balance is then remitted to SPS.

 

DPR evaluates its fees and charges on an annual basis as part of the City’s budget process.  Attachment 2 to the Ordinance, “Changes from the Adopted 2011-2012 Fee Schedule to the Proposed 2012 Fee Schedule” reflects DPR’s proposed fee changes for 2012.

 

DPR’s fees are reviewed annually to determine whether changes to the fee structure are warranted.  Improved cost recovery is a consideration when developing fee increases and implementing cost of living adjustments, consistent with the City Budget Office’s inflation guidelines. 

 

In 2009, the City Council adopted a Statement of Legislative Intent (SLI 73-2-A-1) requesting DPR to submit a fee policy proposal no later than March 31, 2010.  This proposal was submitted to the Council as requested.  The policy established a methodology to consider community benefit, consistency, market pricing consistency, affordability and equity when setting fees.  The fee changes proposed in this legislation are consistent with the intent and guidelines of that policy.

 

Additionally, the legislation restructures and simplifies certain fees, and corrects previous misprints or omissions.  Changes to the fee structure are identified in Attachment 2 to the Ordinance.

 

 

__X__ This legislation has financial implications.

 

Summary of Changes to Revenue Generated Specifically from this Legislation: 

 

 

Revenue Source

2012 Proposed

 

Income from User Fees

$52,000

Total Fees and Charges Resulting From Passage of This Ordinance

 

 

$52,000

(If new revenue is for a partial year, provide estimate for full year in the notes section below.)

 

Revenue Change Notes:  Income from User Fees include a pilot program at Amy Yee Tennis Center changing the fee structure related to recreational fees to include a 10% higher fee for non-residents (users who live outside of the City of Seattle) estimated at $5,000, and a .75 percentage point increase in class participation (PAR) fees estimated at $47,000.

 

The pilot non-resident fee is new for the City, however several agencies throughout the region already charge a non-resident fee. The rationale for the fee is that Seattle residents contribute more to the operating costs of DPR facilities through City taxes.  Therefore, a non resident fee helps to assure that non-residents pay a more equitable portion of the costs to provide DPR services. The estimated revenues in the above table reflect lower annual revenues due to program start up costs.  The Department anticipates full year revenues for this non-resident fee will be $7,000 higher at $12,000.

 

The PAR fee is a charge for recreation programs provided by the City through the Associated Recreation Council (ARC).  The fee has not been adjusted since 2005. While the increase proposed for 2012 is minimal, it may result in either operational impacts to ARC (reduction in administration and/or services offered), or an increase in recreation fees. The fees are set to allow ARC to cover their expenses. While ARC believes it can absorb the PAR fee increase, there is a chance that future program fees would need to be increased to allow them to recover their costs. This is historically been how fees have been handled and doesn’t represent a departure from past fee setting practices.

 

In addition to the non-resident fee and the PAR Fee, several other minor changes were made to the fee schedule that are not expected to result in notable changes to DPR’s revenue.  These minor changes include:  rental fees for the newly constructed Dakota Place Shelterhouse; a construction plan review fee that was added in 2011 but erroneously left out of the fee schedule for 2011-12; swim card fees were reduced by $0.05 to accommodate DPR’s automated registration system; the super-deluxe swimming pool birthday party package was combined with the rental of the lobby/deck, and the combined package was reduced by $5; and the Camp Long Picnic Shelter fee was reduced by $5 to make it consistent with all other DPR picnic shelter fees.

 

Anticipated Total Revenue from Entire Program, Including Changes Resulting from this Legislation:

 

Fund Name and Number

Revenue Source

Total 2012 Revenue

Parks and Recreation Fund (10200)

Income from User Fees

$10,856,500

TOTAL

 

$10,856,500

 

Total Revenue Notes: None

 

Other Implications:

 

a)      Does the legislation have indirect financial implications, or long-term implications?

The changes contained in this proposal are part of a concerted effort on the part of DPR to improve its overall fee structure, maintain costs and, to the extent possible, increase cost recovery.  DPR will continue to review its fee policies and schedules, in terms of the economy, changes in park and recreation services provided by other local jurisdictions, and other internal and external factors affecting the Department’s budget.

 

b)      What is the financial cost of not implementing this legislation? Not implementing this legislation as proposed would require reductions in services or programs within the DPR’s 2012 proposed budget.  Such reductions would impact the Department’s ability to generate revenue that is used to pay for costs associated with operating and maintaining its facilities.

 

c)      Does this legislation affect any departments besides the originating department? No

 

d)      What are the possible alternatives to the legislation that could achieve the same or similar objectives? There are not alternatives that could achieve the same or similar objectives. In adjusting its Fees and Charges Schedule, the Department has considered all known external funding resources, such as grants and other one-time funding sources.

 

e)      Is the legislation subject to public hearing requirements?         No

 

f)       Other Issues: None

 

Please list attachments to the fiscal note below: None