January 2025 – Parks & Recreation - 12

WE ARE PARKS AND RECREATION
The Risk of Parks and Recreation's
Ever-Increasing Focus on Cost Recovery
By Ethan Wing
T
he services park and recreation professionals provide are essential
to healthy communities. Unfortunately, a growing emphasis on cost
recovery threatens the accessibility and sustainability of these public
services. Cost-recovery targets have become ingrained in park and
recreation departments, which are often seen as a way of reducing the financial
burden on local governments. However, this focus can overshadow the broader
value of these services. Park and recreation services are essential public goods.
Treating them as profit-driven entities, even partially, diminishes their perceived
value to society and threatens their long-term sustainability.
Impact on Equity
During economic downturns, the
need for affordable recreation services
increases,
yet
cost-recovery
targets
often rise as a knee-jerk reaction
to budget cuts. This approach
can make services prohibitively expensive
or unavailable to those who
need them most, widening the gap
between those who can afford to participate
and those who cannot and
exacerbating existing inequalities.
Agencies often justify cost recovery
by arguing that some programs
should generate extra revenue to subsidize
essential but less profitable programs.
While this may be theoretically
sound, it frequently falls short in practice.
Large portions of agency budgets
are often dedicated to higher-cost
recovery programs when it might be
more effective to cut those programs
entirely and redirect resources toward
more essential services.
Many
agencies
cost-recovery
rely
methodologies
on
that
categorize programs into different
tiers based on concepts like individual
versus group benefits. However,
these classifications often lack
transparency and consistency in
implementation. For example, adult
sports leagues are frequently placed
in the highest cost-recovery tier
without clear justification - a decision
that can seem arbitrary and disconnected
from the true value these
programs offer communities.
Using market rates to determine
pricing assumes that park and recreation
departments are competing
with private companies. However,
public services should prioritize accessibility
and equity over competition.
When public agencies adopt
market-driven pricing, low-income
individuals and families may be excluded
from participation, undermining
the principles of public service.
12 Parks & Recreation |
J ANUAR Y 2 0 2 5 | PARK S ANDRECRE AT ION . OR G
Advocacy as Strategy
The emphasis on cost recovery is a
symptom of broader systemic problems,
including
wealth
inequality
and unfair tax laws. Park and recreation
departments are often among
the first to face budget cuts. A cultural
shift within the field is necessary,
with increased advocacy for equitable
tax policies and greater public
investment becoming the focus.
At the end of the day, an
over-fixation on cost recovery is a
dangerous trend that threatens the
core mission of park and recreation
services. Constantly increasing
revenue targets to compensate
for budget shortfalls places undue
stress on staff and signals to local
governments and the public that
park and recreation departments
can sustain themselves without appropriate
funding. Instead, agencies
should advocate for long-term, stable
funding sources that focus on
the sustainability of services rather
than short-term revenue generation.
To ensure these services continue
to play a vital role in community
health, park and recreation departments
must refocus on their broader
societal benefits. By recognizing
their true value as public services
and engaging the community in
funding decisions, we can ensure
parks and recreation remains accessible,
equitable and sustainable
for all.
Ethan Wing is a Park and Recreation
Professional (ethanwing20@gmail.com).
January 2025 – Parks & Recreation

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of January 2025 – Parks & Recreation
