 |
Home | Search | Browse | About IPO | Staff | Links |
|
Home | Search | Browse | About IPO | Staff | Links |
|
How does recreation Local recreation services have become a major industry by creating employment, stimulating business diversification and strengthening Illinois' overall business climate. Editor's Note: More detailed information about the following study is available in the Proceedings from the Governor's Conference on the Economic Significance of Recreation in Illinois. An order form for these Proceedings is provided in this issue.
By Larry K. Belknap A common justification for providing local-level recreation services is the personal wellness received by recreation participants and their families. Most recreationists would agree they are searching for mental, physical and social benefits when participating in public recreation activities. Many families suggest that attractive park-lands enhance the beauty of the community, increase property values and provide a nice place to raise a family. The expenditure of tax dollars for recreation programs and facilities is a common occurrence among Illinois communities. Recreation services are sponsored by more than 400 public recreation and park agencies throughout the State. Public recreation in Illinois is a big business and has a sizeable impact on the overall economy of communities providing tax support for public recreation. Therefore, the economic impact created exists as another justification for local-level recreation services. Economic justification Recreation services in Illinois create employment, stimulate business diversification and strengthen the State's business climates. Recreation plays an integral role in making Illinois an appealing place in which to have and do business. These points provided the impetus for a comprehensive study of the economic significance of leisure and recreation in Illinois. This statewide effort was coordinated by the State Department of Conservation (DOC) and supported by Gov. James Thompson. As a part of the State comprehensive study, the economic benefits of local-level recreation services were researched. The Illinois study revealed salaries and fringe benefits paid to public recreation workers, tax revenues generated for local recreation services and the extent of agency disbursements to local and State businesses. The Recreation and Park Administration Program at Illinois State University, in conjunction with the Illinois Association of Park Districts (IAPD), conducted the statewide survey. Survey results With the assistance of the IAPD, questionnaires were sent to chief administrators of 422 known public recreation and park agencies in Illinois. A total of 160 agencies (38 percent) provided data concerning the economic impact of local recreation services on the State's economy. The February, 1985 survey included park districts, forest preserve districts, conservation districts, municipal recreation and/or park departments and special recreation associations. Data was collected in the areas of budgeting and finance, staff salaries and benefits, and disbursements to local businesses. All administrators were asked for financial information based upon 1984 fiscal year totals.
Illinois Parks and Recreation 7 November/December 1986 Prior to mailing the survey instrument, a preliminary questionnaire was pilot tested by nine park and recreation administrators representing each type of local recreation authority. The pilot study proved helpful in finalizing the format and content of the questionnaire; that is, 12 additional categories of business firms were added to the final instrument. Administrative authority Of the 160 responding agencies, 72 percent were Illinois park districts while 10 percent were combined park and recreation departments within city-town-village government. Eight percent of all responses represented special recreation associations. It should be mentioned that one county-level park and recreation agency was included in the study. Population of jurisdiction The population of jurisdiction was reported by each responding agency. Some 51.2 percent of the responding agencies reported a total population of less than 20,000. Fifty-seven agencies (35.6 percent) reported populations greater than 30,000. The mean population of all reporting agencies was 26,500. Recreation tax income The survey also reported the number and percent of agencies according to the amount of recreation income received through local tax levies. The mean income awarded to each agency was calculated as $962,500. When comparing the mean income to the mean population (26,500), a per capita amount was determined. This provided an indication of the amount each citizen pays for public recreation. Based on the per capita results of this study, each person contributed an annual tax amount of $36.32 for their public recreation opportunities. A mean budget of $1,144,600 was calculated from the data submitted by the recreation and park agencies surveyed in the study. This mean value included all agency income, even revenue obtained from sources other than local taxes. The budget amounts in Table 1 reflect information based on 160 responding agencies with a population mean of 26,500. A per capita amount of $43.19 was derived by comparing the mean budget of agencies to the mean population for the study. This per capita amount reflects an approximate financial commitment that public recreation agencies make to each citizen in their jurisdiction.
Personnel disbursements The study was further designed to determine the number of agency personnel and amounts of their salaries and benefits. Agency personnel were placed within categories that included program services, park and resource management, and ancillary duties such as administrative assistants and clerical staff. The amounts in Table 2 indicate that more than $500,000 was dispersed by agencies for employee salaries and benefits. This resulted in a $20 per capita total for each community. In effect, each citizen within the reporting jurisdiction paid $20 per year for professional staff to deliver their public recreation services. A key point to be made is that employees will spend large amounts of their paychecks in close proximity to where they live. This greatly assists in perpetuating the overall business climate within communities in Illinois. Table 3 portrays total and mean disbursements for goods and services that public recreation agencies paid Illinois businesses in 1984. Total and mean disbursements were recorded for each of 46 types of Illinois businesses. All mean disbursements were added to develop an average amount ($321,924) paid to Illinois businesses. When comparing the mean population (26,500) to the $321,924 average amount paid to Illinois businesses in one year, the result was a per capita disbursement of $12.15. This indicates that public recreation agencies paid businesses in Illinois an amount equal to $12.15 per person within their jurisdiction. Per capita summary The amounts in Table 4 reveal a summary of per capita income and disbursements for the 160 reporting public recreation agencies in Illinois. The total per capita income for public agencies was $43.19 while the total per capita disbursement totaled $32.15. This indicates that 74.4 percent of the per capita income was returned to local and State businesses. Illinois Parks and Recreation 8 November/December 1986
The summary data reveals a return of local government recreation funds to communities in the form of employee salaries and benefits, and goods and services purchased from local and State businesses. Concluding remarks The data collected from this study presents a strong case for Illinois' standing as a national leader in the provision of public park and recreation services. A $43.19 per capita income reflects strong community support for Illinois public recreation services. A 1974 study by Godbey reported a $20 per capita budget for public recreation on a national level. The National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) has indicated that approximately $22 is spent per capita for public recreation on a national level. Noticeably, Illinois exceeds these national per capita amounts reported from previous research studies. A mean amount of $530,000 spent for employee salaries and benefits, and $322,000 disbursed to businesses totals a direct economic impact of $852,000. Incidentally, the Bureau of Budget has estimated that most indirect impacts approximate between 50 and 60 percent of the direct impacts. The application of indirect impacts to the total direct amount would portray a $1.3 to $1.4 million total economic impact per public recreation agency in Illinois. Furthermore, a statewide industry that employs an average of 26 full-time and 114 part-time employees can have a substantial economic impact on a community. These averages become quite meaningful when one considers there are 422 recognized public recreation agencies in Illinois. Further study Recreation professionals in Canada have begun to report the results of studies that determine the economic impact of public recreation. An article in Recreation British Columbia reported that the Revelstoke Parks and Recreation Department anticipated a net cost per capita of $61.50, or $5.12 per month in 1985. The Revelstoke
Illinois Parks and Recreation 9 November/December 1986 study exemplifies the sophistication placed on assessing the economic impact of public recreation services today. Further studies could provide additional information regarding the economic impact of public recreation in Illinois. The Illinois study did not investigate the precise indirect impact of money disbursed by public recreation agencies within Illinois. Businesses were not surveyed to determine further effects of the recreation dollar on the State's economy. Employees were not asked to account for the discretionary spending of their paychecks. Non-residents traveling to Illinois communities for public recreation activities could be dispersing sizeable amounts of money to local businesses. This would create an economic benefit of great importance to townships in Illinois. This Illinois public recreation study revealed the direct economic impact of employee salaries and benefits and agency disbursements to State businesses. The information is expected to greatly assist in assessing the overall economic impact of public recreation in Illinois. The results of this study should be valuable to public recreation administrators, agency board members and legislative supporters in Springfield. There is a great deal of tax support for local level recreation in Illinois. Major portions of these monies are returned to local and State businesses which strengthen the overall economy of the State. In the long run, citizens and businesses benefit from public recreation services. Citizens are attracted to pleasant living environments and valuable recreation opportunities while local businesses utilize the income to remain competitive within local and State markets.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS: Dr. Larry K. Belknap is currently an associate professor of recreation within the Recreation and Park Administration Program at Illinois State University. He has served as head of the curriculum at Illinois State and Marshall Universities. His practitioner experiences are in the areas of public recreation, campus activities and outdoor recreation services. Brian Baldea is currently serving as admissions counselor/assistant baseball coach at Illinois State University. He previously taught for four years and coordinated the program management sequence in the Recreation and Park Administration Program at Illinois State. Prior to his work in higher education, he served as director of the Marshfield, WI, Recreation Department.
Illinois Parks and Recreation 10 November/December 1986 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|