Form revised December 4, 2006

FISCAL NOTE FOR NON-CAPITAL PROJECTS

Department:	Contact Person/Phone:	DOF Analyst/Phone:
Parks and Recreation	Michele Finnegan / 684-7157	Jennifer Devore / 615-1328

Legislation Title:

AN ORDINANCE relating to community advisory councils; authorizing the Superintendent of Parks and Recreation to enter into an agreement with the Associated Recreation Council for the purpose of assisting in planning and implementing recreational activities, life‑long learning and other programs for the public, and coordinating and supporting the activities of community advisory councils; amending Sections 18.04.010 and 18.04.050, and repealing Sections 18.04.020, 18.04.030 and 18.04.040 of the Seattle Municipal Code.

· Summary of the Legislation:  The proposed legislation authorizes the Superintendent of Parks and Recreation (Superintendent) to enter into a new Master Services Agreement (MSA) with the Associated Recreation Council (ARC).  The current agreement between the Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) and ARC is authorized under a 1976 Ordinance (105655).  This proposed legislation also amends certain sections of the DPR Park Code that were codified as part of that Ordinance.

· Background: The existing relationship between DPR and ARC and its member Advisory Councils (ACs) was authorized in 1976 by Ordinance 105655.  Since that time, the partnership has grown to encompass programs at 26 community centers, four environmental learning centers, three city-wide programs, one tennis center, two boating facilities, and two arts and culture facilities. 

In October 2003, former Superintendent Ken Bounds launched an initiative with the ARC Board and the ACs to modernize this partnership in such a manner as to allow for efficient and effective decision-making on system-wide issues, while still encouraging unique recreational programming at the local level.  A steering committee composed of DPR staff, ARC board members, and AC members worked together to create a strategic plan for the delivery of recreation services.

This proposed agreement sets forth certain principles by which DPR, ARC, and (under ARC’s management) the ACs, will work together to provide recreation and life-long learning programs and services to increased numbers of residents, to improve connections to neighborhoods and communities, to develop infrastructure systems that support the effective delivery of such programs and services, and to develop sustainable financial resources, all in accordance with the strategic plan’s mission of “building community through citizen engagement and participation in recreation and lifelong learning programs,” and the vision of providing “equitable, dynamic and responsive recreation and lifelong learning programs that are a part of the life of every Seattle resident.”

· Please check one of the following:

____ This legislation does not have any financial implications. (Stop here and delete the remainder of this document prior to saving and printing.)

_X__ This legislation has financial implications. (Please complete all relevant sections that follow.)

Notes:  There is no additional revenue/reimbursement anticipated from this legislation.  This agreement continues the existing revenue reimbursement relationship between DPR and ARC.  Funding for ARC’s services is included in the 2008 Proposed Budget.

· What is the financial cost of not implementing the legislation?  Not implementing this legislation would result in DPR and ARC continuing to operate under the existing agreement.  The financial impact of that is difficult to quantify.  The existing agreement does not represent the current roles and responsibilities of either entity.  For example, it does not reflect the system-wide roles for ARC outlined in this agreement, such as providing marketing and program evaluation for all recreation programs.  It could result in the City of Seattle (City) having to take on those roles and would require additional implementation funding.

· What are the possible alternatives to the legislation that could achieve the same or similar objectives?  The City could choose not to enter into this agreement with ARC, but instead provide all public recreation programs and related services itself.  However, it would not continue the community involvement ethic that this relationship provides and would require considerable additional positions and funding to implement.

Is the legislation subject to public hearing requirements:  This legislation is not subject to a public hearing.  The advisory council volunteers have been kept up-to-date on this process through regular meetings with the ARC Board.  In addition, the Board of Park Commissioners was briefed on this issue earlier in 2007. 

Other Issues:  Under this agreement, the City will continue to provide space and infrastructure support to ARC at no cost.  

Please list attachments to the fiscal note below:  None