Posted: April 7th, 2008

A Tale of Two Studies: Some Concerned Rec and Parks Report Replicates Work Already Done

by Anna Scott
Los Angeles Downtown News April 7, 2008

The city Department of Recreation and Parks, under scrutiny for $130 million in unspent park funds gathered from developers, now faces increased pressure to come up with a plan for the money.

In the coming weeks, Downtown-based nonprofit The City Project will work with city officials to analyze how the money could be spent in each of the 15 council districts. Much of the information expected in The City Project’s final report - which will be refined from a study the organization released last year - overlaps with Recreation and Parks’ ongoing analysis of park needs throughout the city.

“I think that we can use it as leverage to urge Recreation and Parks to move much more expeditiously,” Ninth District Councilwoman Jan Perry said of The City Project’s upcoming report.

On March 18, The City Project presented its 2007 report “Healthy Parks, Schools, and Communities: Mapping Green Access and Equity for the City of Los Angeles” to the City Council. While focused on racial and economic disparities in relation to park access, the report contains several elements expected in Recreation and Parks’ final study, including interactive maps combining district-by-district breakdowns of existing park facilities with demographic data.

Some have charged that the Recreation and Parks Department’s Citywide Needs Assessment is replicating at least some of the information already gathered by The City Project. Robert Garcia, the group’s executive director, in the past said he had sought to work with the department, but received little feedback.

“We’ve met with [Recreation and Parks General Manager] Jon Mukri,” said Garcia. “We gave them our plan almost two years ago, and we want action.”

He is not the only one. Jennifer Wolch, director of USC’s Center for Sustainable Studies, led another parks report that was completed last year. She said she has met with Recreation and Parks officials and discussed using her data to help speed up their process. “I’ve talked to them about it, but they’re doing what they think is best to them,” she said. Though Wolch said she does plan to collaborate with Recreation and Parks on other projects, she added, “There’s a lot of fragmentation and duplication of effort, when it’s important that large agencies… come together.”

Recreation and Parks Executive Officer Regina Adams said there will be differences between her department’s report and those already completed.

“The City Project’s study is a demographic analysis which primarily focuses on the disparities in park acreage for minority groups across the City,” Adams wrote in an email. “The Needs Assessment Project is much more comprehensive as it will focus not just on simple metrics such as park acreage, but on what actual facilities/features City residents (from all socio-economic and ethnic backgrounds) need and want at existing parks and future parks, and how those needs are currently being met with the existing system in order to identify future Department priorities.”

Mukri added in an email, “As for speeding up the RAP process, we have a comprehensive and detailed work plan based around actual community meetings.”

Quimby Problem

Fifteenth District Councilwoman Janice Hahn, who invited The City Project to present its findings, said during the March 18 meeting that she views the nonprofit’s study as a complement to the one being undertaken by Recreation and Parks.

“Your own work is really letting us pinpoint where our own Department of Recreation and Parks can focus its resources on building more parks,” she said.

The City Project will work with the Bureau of Engineering and each council district office to update the 2007 report, incorporating some previously missing information on existing parks and a tally of available funds for each district.

“Then we can create another layer on top of our existing city map,” said Garcia. “We can develop a plan for spending it as soon as we find out what the source of the money is.” Garcia said he expects to produce the final report within two months.

While Garcia plans to collaborate with Recreation and Parks on several future projects, he sharply criticized the department’s slow pace. The City Project’s study, he said, was partly based on recommendations included in past audits of Recreation and Parks. “It shouldn’t take two and a half years to come up with a strategic plan and a needs assessment,” said Garcia. “There’s no need to reinvent the wheel.”

Recreation and Parks announced its study last year after Mukri revealed that despite accumulating nearly $130 million in park funds known as Quimby fees over the past five years, the Department has no effective system for tracking or spending the money.

Collected from residential developers citywide, Quimby fees cost approximately $3,000 to $9,000 per housing unit and must be used to fund park projects within two miles of where they are gathered.

In January and February, Recreation and Parks held a number of public forums for its study. Consultants from landscape architecture firm Mia Lehrer & Associates and planning firm PROs Consulting are expected to compile a list of priorities for Recreation and Parks by next month. Consultants will use the information to help create an inventory of each council district’s parks, needs and available funds. A master plan, to detail a long-term strategy for Recreation and Parks, is expected in approximately a year.

City Council President Eric Garcetti said he expects the two studies to work in conjunction.

“It’s useful to have both kinds of information, and both studies will help shape our city’s ‘greenprint’ in the next few years,” he said.

However, City Controller Laura Chick, who last month released an audit critical of the Quimby program Downtown, was not optimistic.

“This has been a painfully slow process,” said Chick. “I welcome The City Project’s involvement, but it is unfortunate that they have had to use their time and energy on something that should have already been completed by our Recreation and Parks Department.”

http://www.downtownnews.com/articles/2008/04/07/news/news06.txt