F C P A

FAIRFAX C OUNTY PARK AUTHORIT Y
M E M O R A N D U M
TO:
Chairman and Members
Park Authority Board
VIA:
Cindy Messinger, Acting Director
FROM:
Barbara Nugent, Director
Park Services Division
DATE:
April 4, 2013
Agenda
Park Services Committee
Wednesday, April 10, 2013 – 4:30 p.m.
Boardroom – Herrity Building
Chairman: Edward R. Batten, Sr.
Vice Chair: Linwood Gorham
Members: Frank S. Vajda, Kala Leggett-Quintana
1. Update on the Issue of Veterans’ Fee Waiver Requests – Information*
2. Park Authority Park Services Division: Oak Marr RECenter Expansion Operations Plan
(with presentation) – Information*
*Enclosures
If accommodations and/or alternative formats are needed, please call (703) 324-8563. TTY (703) 803-3354
This page intentionally left blank.
Board Agenda Item
April 24, 2013
INFORMATION
Update on the Issue of Veteran’s Fee Waiver Requests
Over time the Park Authority Board has received requests to consider a Resident
Disabled Veteran Lifetime Pass (fee waiver).
On December 12, 2012, Mr. Gorham received a request from a constituent through
Supervisor Hyland’s office to consider discounts or free admission to our parks and
RECenters for veterans, specifically disabled veterans. Mr. Gorham asked staff to
study the impact of the Park Authority and to come up with a program to allow,
specifically, disable veterans to our facilities for free.
In 2003, in response to a Board of Supervisors’ matter, the Park Authority provided a
memo to then County Executive Anthony Griffin detailing the existing policy regarding
fee waivers. The memo expressed concern over the fiscal impacts of fee waivers as
well as describes the current manner in which customers have to seek relief from class
fees (Attachment 1).
On August 4, 2008, the Park Authority received a request from a Fairfax County
resident to establish a no-fee Park Authority Resident 100% Disabled Veteran Lifetime
Pass. The pass would allow free use of “public facilities and services managed by
Fairfax County Park Authority” for 100% disabled veterans and accompanying family
members. A response was sent from the Chairman indicating that current policies and
practices do not allow for such a benefit, and any recommendation in this regard would
need to be addressed by the Park Authority Board (Attachment 2).
In 2009, the Executive Committee met about this request again after receiving a letter
from Mr. Ohaneson requesting reconsideration and it was reaffirmed the original
decision with consultation with the Office of the County Attorney would stand.
The Park Authority’s user fee policy (Policy 403) allows for the establishment of fees for
facilities and services supported by the Park Revenue Fund. Revenues generated from
fees are used to fund revenue facility operations and maintenance, revenue bond debt
obligations and a limited amount of long-term capital repair and replacement needs.
Staff annually recommends adjustments to the fees in the agency fee schedule, which
are then approved and adopted by the Park Authority Board. The Park Authority Board
periodically gets requests from individuals and groups for fee waivers. Historically, the
Board has denied all fee waiver requests out of a desire to treat all groups fairly and not
favor the waivers of some groups and not others (Attachment 4).
Board Agenda Item
April 24, 2013
Staff believes providing a waiver based solely on disability would run counter to the
spirit and intent of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). This position has been
supported by the county’s Disability Services Board in input it provided to the Park
Authority Board during the 2005 fee deliberations on the senior discount (Attachment
2).
The Park Authority has supported efforts over time to provide access to both golf and
RECenters and this past year through the Wounded Warrior program operated through
Neighborhood and Community Services. Golf Enterprises provided almost 70 rounds of
golf at five separate courses including Laurel Hill Golf Club and in addition eight
Discount Fast Passes were sold, five guest passes, and an assortment of classes were
purchased.
Other considerations regarding the approval of this fee waiver for a Resident Disabled
Veteran Lifetime Pass include the following:
•
Establishing a no-fee pass for 100% disabled veterans would set a precedent which
could prompt similar requests from veterans with disabilities less than 100%.
Please see 2011 Fairfax County census information (Attachment 5).
•
The Disability Services Board remains consistent with its desire to have equal
access for all persons with and without disabilities according to staff.
•
Instituting fee waivers for a particular group of disabled residents (i.e., disabled
veterans) would establish a precedent and could likely prompt pursuit of fee
reductions and/or waivers from other disabled groups as well, including residents
with physical, sensory, and/or intellectual disabilities.
•
No other Fairfax County department or local park and recreation agency provides a
benefit similar to that requested.
•
Allowing this waiver could obligate the Park Revenue Fund to provide a significant
revenue subsidy, which would run counter to the agency’s recent strategy to
minimize subsidies to manageable levels in an effort to improve financial
performance.
In conclusion, Park Services does not believe there is an equitable manner to
implement a plan designed solely for veterans who have been identified as 100%
disabled or otherwise.
Board Agenda Item
April 24, 2013
FISCAL IMPACT:
While it is not possible to determine fiscal impact directly, it can be inferred from the
number of county residents that would be eligible for no-fee passes. The waiver would
set a precedent that could expose the Park Authority to similar requests from an
additional estimated 13,698 veterans with lesser disabilities, as well as from
approximately 70,148 Fairfax County residents with some form of intellectual, sensory,
or physical disability.
ENCLOSED DOCUMENTS:
Attachment 1: 2003 memo from former Director Mike Kane to then County Executive
Anthony Griffin
Attachment 2: 2008 letter from Mr. Ohaneson requesting the establishment of a 100%
Disabled Veteran fee waiver
Attachment 3: November 2008 letter from then Park Authority Board Chairman Harold
Strickland denying the request
Attachment 4: 2009 letter from Chairman William Bouie to Mr. Ohaneson reaffirming
original decision
Attachment 5: 2011 Fairfax County Census data on persons with disabilities
STAFF:
Cindy Messinger, Acting Director
Sara K. Baldwin, Deputy Director/COO
Barbara Nugent, Director, Park Services Division
Cindy Walsh, Director, Resource Management Division
Todd Johnson, Director, Park Operations Division
David Bowden, Director, Planning and Development Division
Gary Logue, Inclusion and ADA Branch Manager, Park Services Division
Steve Lewis, Business Manager, Park Services Division
This page intentionally left blank.
Atta,chment 1
•
FAIRFAX COUNTY PARK AUTHORITY
.......................
;
.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Anthony 11.Griffin, county~x<cutiV
FROM:
Mtehael A. Kane, DJTector
'.
DATE:
December 3, 2003
. SUBJECT;
,,
•
.. ..
,,;..
.
"
Reduced Rates for Citizens with Disabilities at RECentcrs
,
At lbe Board of Supervisors' meeting on July 7, 2003, Supervisor Frey nnted thatth. County offe~
reduced rates to senior citizens using Park Authority RECenters. He had been contacted by a
consTituent who inquircd ahoulthe possibility oroffering the sume reduced rate to citizens with
disabilities. Slsffwas directed 10 detem1ine any ls!'ues regarding the feasibility of offering a reduced
rate to citizens w~th disabiliTies at Park AU1hori\y RECcntc:rs.
,
'.
~.
:,
.
The .current 50% discount ror senior use ofRECenters should nOI be cxtended .to coJ~IY residenls
wilh disabilities based solely on lheir disability. While. laudable, to do so would be inconsistent with
ADA philosophy and would place an added Iin.ncial burden on thc I'ark Authority Revenue Fund
that would be unmanageable hased upon the followin~ rationale:
•
The Park Authority currenrly offers a 50% tiiscoullt to sen.iors for luilion classes and facility use.
al RECelllers and golf course .• nased 011 a cOllnl>,vidcpolic!, that waS e/lacled in 1984, The
policy .•toted "that.ll, public agencies charge one-holf price for all lUilion classes and pay-as. yougo events (such as swimming and golf) for senior adults over age 60." The policy also exempted'
"out-of.County
entertainment
tours organized
by
the Recreation
Department
and financed
completely by participant fees."
•
•.
Although the senior discounl pulicy impacts a /lumber of County service providers, the Park
Authority is lmique in thaI it must absorb the full impact of the discount pulicy ilt its ~eyenue'
Fund. Whe~ cnacted the policy was nol considered 'financially onerous, since the County's'
senior population was comparatively small. The Board item ratifying the policy did anticipate
the need Lorevisit the policy in the fu\i.lre, wht:n the st'IlJQI" proportion of the populalion b~.came
larger.
•
The impacl ofrhe senior dis(,.'ounl policy has cou:"ied a struciliral problem within the Park'
AuthoriO', Revenue Fund. Due to the expected b'TU\I,.'th
in the senior population, the Iinancial
impacl of the senior fee policy on the ParK /\UrhOrlIY Rcvcnu," Fund has become significant.
issue has been a topic of conversation berween the Park Authority
Supervisors for sro:veral years, most recently al the Joint PAB/BOS
FY200J,
the impact of the senior discount
Board and the Board of
meeting 1n March.2002.
pulicy on the Park Revenue
Th~
_.
In.
Fund reached $1.57
million.
The financial burden has become signitkunt at a time when the Park Authority is
finding it e.xlremely difficull to meet Park AUthOrity Board targets for set aside reserves that can
.
-
.
I'
•
.
.
Anthony H. Griffin
Decemher 3, 2003
Page 2
be used for facility mainH:nance and renovations. In fY2003 no rcsen,e funds Were transferred
from the Revenue Fund (Fund 170) to Fund 371 for a set aside, since lhe year-end net revenue f9r
Fund 170 was only $13,361. The Park Authority's Financial Managemeot Plan also projects thaI
the Park Revenue Fund will nol be able to meet aside targets in either IT 2004 or IT 2005.
•
ii, an efforl to address the existing s,ructural problem in the Park Revenlle Fund caused by Ihe
50% senior discount. sJalfhas proposed a nwJti.year. phased reduction 01 [he senior discount
percentage 10 the Park Aurllorily Board. The Park Authority Board has endorsed the concept in
principal, although has yet to ael pending a sign nf support from the Board ",fSupervisors,
•
Population analysis indicates that extending the 50% di.'icounr to those residems will1 disabiiWes
would place an additional burden On Ihe Park Revenlle Fund that could nOI be absorbed by thai
FUlld alone. Approximately, I) .5% of the Fairfax County population is eligible for the current
agc.based discount ba~ed on Census figures. The Census also indicates thai 12.3% of the
populalion agc 5 and older has a di,ability. Roughly, a quarter of the population with disabilities
is already eligible for lhe 50% discount by virtue of their age. Thai means an additional 9% of
the populalion would bc eligible for Ihc 50% discnunt if people with disabilities were included,
wilh the pntenliallo add an additional S I ,23 million impact 10 the Park Revenue Fund
j
•
. Debt service restrictions in the Pork Re\/e"ue Fund prohibit the ability ofihe fund to absorb
another subsidy. Revcnue bond fonancing of Ihe Laurel Hill Golf Course has also reduced the
flexibility oflhe Park Revenue Fund to absorb additional subsidies. Annual debt service
payments are currently slightly above $1.0 million per year and will b'fOW to about $1.9 million
anmlally by FY 2012. An associated bond indenture covenant requires maintaining a debt
service ratio of al least 125%.
•
Park Authnrity Incilision & ADA ,flOt!does nOI sUPI""'( extendin~ the 50"/6 discollnl to residents
with disabilities simply on the basis oJtheir disability. TI,e opinion of agency Inclusion & ADA
SUPPOTl slalTis that this would constitute special treatmenl and, therefore, would he contrary to
the ADA philosophy which seeks to provide equal opportunity on the basis of disability not
income.
Just because
an individual
is disabled doe$ not mean they do not have the ability to pay
use fees. 11,s true that a greater proportion of (he disabled populallOn of fairfax County has
'abiJity to pay' issues than the portion oflhe population tbal does nol have disabilities, but low
income and disabled are eenainly not synonymous. A Census compari!;on ofpoveny slatus and
disabilily slarus for fairfax County shows Ihal 7.8% of Ihe disahled population age 5 and above
has household incomes below poveny status cumpared with 4% of those who do nOl have
disabililies.
•
The Park Authority sOllght til" npillion ojlhe 1)i"abililv Sen'ices Board rDSB) inJormulaiing Ihis
The DSB endoJ'ses and supports (m (lpproach basad on./inuncial r1eed rather t/rall
elltitlement by virtue of age. diSl.1bility or allY other cnte.ria. They did raise the issue, however,
thal if the f'enior discount was nnl replaced by a needs~based sy.lilem thai they would be
~urportive orextending a ~iml1ar entitlement 10 rcsidcn!s wtlll disl:ibililies.
reSpOn,<iI~.
-
--------------
"':l..
Anlhony H. Griffin
November 25, 2003
"
Page 3
It is my intention to again recommend 10 the Park Authority Board to address lhe senior fee issue
. with ihe Board of Supervisors, possibly althelr anOllOl joint meeting, If you ~ave any questions,
p~ea$e give'me a call. . Jo
"
cc: Timothy K, While, Deputy Director
•
.
;
•
..
'"~
"
•.••.
.:
This page intentionally left blank.
Attachment
2
.orski, Barbara .J.
;ubject:
FW.: OFF Ohaneson Disabled Veteran Lifetime Pass
..- •.Original
Message----From: Pedersen,
Judith
sent: Tuesday,
August
05, 2008 9:19AM
ro~ 'mrohaneson.cox.net
l
Cc: Dargle, Jr, John W.: Messinger, Cindy
subject: OFF Ohaneson
Disabled Veteran Lifetime
Dear Mr.
Pass
Ohaneson,
Thank
you for this
forwarding
this
e.mail
correspondence
appropriately
and the suggestion
for response
on behalf
of veterans.
I am
aDd consideration.
warmest regards,
Judy Pedersen
Public
xnformation
-----Origirial
From;
Officer
Message-----
mrohanesonOcox.net
[mailto:mrohaneson.cox.nee]
Sent. 11t>n<ky, "aguee-o<l,- 20082:26
PM
To: parkmail
.
Subject: Feedback to: All Board Members
Submitted. at Man Aug
<I 2008 14:26:06
COIIIIIlent
: FCPA Board
Members:
...
-_ ..
_ ...
from 199.129.80.9
X am ••..
Fairfax County resident and a .100 percent disabled veteran.
:I am
contacting
all FCPA Board Members today in an attempt to garner support with the
establishment
of a no. fee FCPA Resident Disabled Veteran ~ifetime Pass. The pass would
admit the pass holder and accompanying
family members to public facilities
and services
managed by Fairfax county Park Authority.
The pass would be used in lieu of a general
public admission pass (e.g. FCP Golf Course Pass, Miniature GOlf Course Pass, Mount Vernon
Ice Skating Pass, REcenter Pass, Wakefield
Skate Park Pass, etc.). Eligible
recipients
of
the pass woUld-be required to submit proof of 100 percent disability
rating from the
Department
of
Vete~ansA£fairs
or a military
Be~ice
department.
Virginia and Fairfax County have limited ways of acknowledging
the sacrifices
of
100 percent disabled veterans and their families.
The establishment. of this pass would be
a pos~tive message sent to the com~un~.tywith m.inimalassociated costs ..
..._.....__ .
I am requesting
full consideration
look forward to your response.
of my request
Respectfully,
Michael
Ohaneson
m:[email protected]
Yourname: Michael
City:
Ohaneson
6615 Cottonwood Drive
Alexandria
State:
VA
lIip'
Phone:
bail:
22310
2404818163
mrobanesonocox.net
Addr~ss:
1
by the FCPA Board
Members.
:I
This page intentionally left blank.
Attachment 3
,.,
_0..;-.,
FAIRFAX
COUNTY PARK AUTHORllY .
.....
~
12055 Government Center Parkway, Suite 927
Fairfall., VA 22035.1118
August 25, 2008 .
Mr, Michael Ohaneson
6615 Cottonwood Drive
Alexandria, VA 22310
Dear Mr. Ohaneson:
Thank .you for your correspondence of August 4 to the Park Authority Board regarding your
request for the establishment of a no-fee FaiIfax County Park Authority Resident Disabled
Veteran Lifetime Pass.
I have asked staff to review and bring to the Park Authority Board their recommendations for a
Park Authority J 00% disabled veteran no-fee Fairfax County Resident Disabled Veteran
Lifetime Pass. Please note that our current"policies llJldpractices do not allow for such a benefit,
and so any recommendation in this regard would need to be addressed by the Park Authority
Board. I assure you that 1he Board will give this issue due consideration.
.
r
Thank you again for sharing your concerns wi1h 1he Park Au1hority Board. If you have any
additional questions, please contact 1he Park Au1hority Director, John W. Dargle, Jr., at
703-324-8578.
Sincerely,
~~cR.~'
....--H..,.old
L. 8mcklBlld -.,...--.-------
----
.........•.....-
Chairman
Copy: Park Au1hority Board
John W. Dargle, Jr., Director
.Cindy Messinger, Deputy Director/COO
Charles Bitlenbring, Director, Park Services Division
-
_- - _
_
_..
'-
c:.::..,
_
This page intentionally left blank.
Attachment 4
FAIRFAX COUNTY PARK AUTHORITY
••..••. u ••••••••••.••••••••..•..•..•..•••..•••••••••..••••.•.••••
o •••••••••••••••••.••••.••......••••••••••.•••
June 15, 2009
M r. Michael R. Ohaneron
6615 Cottonwood Drive
Alexandria, VA 2231 0-2845
Dear Mr. Ohaneron:
Thank you for your r~t
letter dated April 13,2009, concerning a re:juesl for further
consideration to eslcblish a Disabled Veteran's Passport based on the Fairfax County Park
Authority Board's i niti al decision to deny the re:juesl on December 10, 2008. After hewing given
due consideration to the information presented and rEViewing all relEVant information, the
Executive Committee has elected not to reconsider the original bo..-d rejection of this issue.
William Bouie
Chairman
Copy: Park A uthority Board
John Dargle, Jr., DireCtor
Cindy. M essinger, COO
If accommodations and/or alternative formalS are needed, please call (703) 324-8563, at least'
days in advance of the registration deadline or event. TIY (703) 803-3354.
0 working'
This page intentionally left blank.
~--
Attachment 5
U.S. Census Bureau
S1810
,
----
DISABILITY CHARACTERISTICS
2011 American Communily Survey l-Yea, Estimates
Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found on the American Community Survey
website
In the Data and Documentation
section.
Sample size and data quality measures (Including coverage rates, allocation rates, and response rates) can be found on the American Community
Survey website
in the Methodology
section.
Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing unit estimates, It Is the Census Bureau's Population
Estimates Program that produces and disseminates Ihe official estimates of the population for the nation, states, counties, cities end towns aOO
estimates of housing units for states and counties .
• ", ... ,.,_.,
.,._.'.,.w...
"'.-'-'---"'-'-
..-.-.--.
i--~-- ...T.~i----------F~t~~~~~T~;bliity---..... Tl'.~:~~ii1.ii-1
.. _-
'-'1
SubJoc:l
.'._.-
-_. __ '"
_..._
.•
,.,
•.
..__
!-----:-. -.-' ._~_.,
i :..~I~
~~~~~~:nnti~~rs
..~..-,--- -.",.-.....-.,-.!-~;~~~~- -1.oae,5eO.
Total civilian nonlnstlutlonallzed population
.;----- ..
---11y--.~-1
..
~
..
-- ..
-~._----.----_.~------
I Margin of Error l
+/-2,172
I Margin of En'C)r..
,E~lmabt
70,148
+/-4,731
EsUmat8
i
6.5% I
~~.J -:~~:~
-~~..._~{~.~
.
+./~~~~;-.~,.
...
-
With a vision difficulty
.__
Popu'lation 5to 17yeais---With a hearing difficulty --------------
.-~ ..
191,164
,.-!~)_;___
+1-264
:
691
4.664
,'--.'--'
------.(X>T-- .....
- (X) ..,,------SSo:.
--,
wtth. vl.l.n dtmculty
cognitIve dlfftCulty
Wrth'an a'mbuloftory'iilffl6U'ity..
With
L
a
+/-732
+1-1,234
+/-466
(X)
_ (X)
373
+/-277
(X)
(X)
('.').
(X)
3.230
505
+1-1,052
+/~344
~J~~Te'iod~:rs -----..---i-7iO,ffJJ.---.,:2~i~.1•..•
_--ai:~~:l_+/~~~
Wtth. heo.ngdlfflculty-
,-
~~~.~:~~ffi:~tY
----- (X)
-.-.-'
...
-~-,~
..
Viilh''B"n-ambiiI8tOrydiffiliitty
--._-'-
j_ .. -
.+--~,
....
j?,)
._".w"'_
i'~--
-f~...-l.-
."-."
..
--li~.--. --,:'j~-'l
.~-(xl"-'W-- "1"5:.~~."-i'
.,,~i:~~~_-':'_.-~1.1'
':1=:" :~~:62~
.__ ,
"~...
0.2%
_1..!~
0.3%
------t~~-i
..-:T~~~ij~---~-_.~-'~".1
-
-(Xl T7:Bo7-1-----.i:2.105-i-.l%-1
~~.+~,,-~.
1----
~~-:~n~~~~n~~~-~~~~9dfkicuttY---.
Population 65 years and over
With. heo.ngdlfflcuitY-.
T
0.9%
2.4%
0.3%
.~i-}.\ '.'._."_,,.~,:,~~._.J
,.::~:"2.~.~:~::r
+/~~"~,
(X)
'.'....
+':2.:001 ......l"'-- .... --''''''-"""2:'2% j
:~~;:~:~-'".
~::~_... !
~6~6~--:"!
':~j~:51'~ . _...
_=_=.~~==~1"~_
(XI- ~'=-~~l:~-==:~,!1a
_~~_.-:."
..-~.~;-':1.:.~~~~":=.=~~;?;~=
~:~-::::::~~~;"ttY-~:----:-t~
t- ..-:1~:L-::=i~:~j~'-:;:i::~-_1::;-J
W1tha
vision
(X) ;
diff;cunY- ,----
~ ..
i
wlth'-jiseif~ni' difflcuhy
Wlfii-an.lndepernfe-rifliVingcHmcuny'-
SEX
..-~::al~
-----
9.3% '
(X)
<><f--'
7,924
I
+/ 1.608
7.2%:
w
:,~_--1,-5:653-T"--'----:;j:2~O!8'-'r"'-~'" '14.'1'%'
6.0%
6.9% .1
ORLAT'INO{jRIGIN
-.--t
~---"'--*--'..
_.
mack or AfrICan American alone
Amel1can-'iOdliin'an~rAJaSka-NafiVe' aione'
.. ASian aiOna'"
_.t .
.-
i.
Native Hawal1an and Other Pacific Islander alone
-'Some other r'aCUalone
1 of 4
+/-1,529
.:!~~~~~.'
....
~.~~::~~:].
. O'neRBce"" . ---,_.--"~---..
.H
i
i
-_..--._-_..
RACE AND HISPANIC
"'''-Whlle alone
(X) .
'-'--".,----CX)--"
10.329
"..
••••
_
••••••
•
__
••
~_
•••
_
.•.•
, •••
~
1
--r--
N
N
N
N
N
6.604
N
+/~1.832
N
"--68i~~~'--'- +1-9,049 ..i~.---'-_.48.8:i21---~".~/-3:618-.,-.--..'..'---:':1%'
+/~3,"680 •..
.7.0~.~_
+/~1.861
6.8%
.. ...._!~3!21?
J..~_...
N
191.756
N
49.667
N.i
+/--5.196
N
N__
_._~/-7.~~ __ .... __ .1.718 .
L
.1, _ .._._~~
~
N.!
4.5%
,__
~
3'~-l
12/1412012
2 of 4
12/1412012
Subject
1 Fairfax CountY,
!
Percent with
i
L....JlJrgl~!a.,.....wJ
i
iI
L.;.• ~J\~!~.!.t?m,,~_
..; !
..."J",,!,,~I,r1 of Errvr.,~
+/-0.4 :
TotafclYiilan'-n-OiiiilStffutiiinaiiZ'etfpopuiaHOii-"
p'opuJ8tiOn"under'S-yesrs'"'-
. --.,.-.".-+'.,.
With a hearing difficultY""
.-.,.'--
-----~--
1Nlth a vision difficulty
I
With a hearing dIfficulty
difficulty -----
_--""
--'--.f"""'-'---"- +/-0.6 ,,"'"
PopuiBilinSto-ffy"Biiill-----'".
Wltha-vlslon
.- ';I=:;:<:},-";
,_.. +/-0.5
.....
+/';'1.0
..- "..~.._--_.~--_.
--- ... -.r-"-. -_.' +/.().2 --:
~"'--"-""'"~""----'-"'-:;i.:o~"1'-"-
"".i,,,_,~=.=:.~3ff'l
~~~~~~.~~~d.~'~'~,I~~'.-'~~~.":-':--'-'"'.-:-~-'-~"~:,_
..
~lth
an ambUlatory
difficulty
...;
:Wifh'8-s'8lf~rediffiCuitY-
!
+/-0.2
.
_. ..............................._.1
Population 18 to 64 years
"~/'().3.''''';
+/-0.5
'
With a vision dIfficulty
+/-0.2
:
With • cognttlva difficulty
+1-<:).3'1
i
WIth B"'h8iiang~ fj'lm'CiUttY
..." '+/~-~~~'j
..- ."'-:"1
+/-0.3 .. !
~=~_~/-fj'~J
With an ambuia1or,. diffiCultY'
~~€!,.~.~~.r~.,,~!.~u.l~,~===,:=,,_.
With an independent living difficulty
Population
'-_._-~--"
65 years and over
W~h.8-.h-earliig.d'ifficu'itY"".,,~..-'_._....
With B vlslon difficulty
--.'..... -,,-,..'''-
,,-_.
"-:;/-1.4-~
'''f
+1-1.2
,
:
+;:1A
Wlth'acognltlve
dlfficulti
With an ambulatory difficulty -".
With a self-care
+/-0.3
+1-2.3
..'-'-T
'-'-'-'--'+1-1.8"
'-'~"""'r-' ....-_.. ~,.
difficulty
W1ih.'Bii--lnd9p6ridQn!,!.vlng"~Iffi~,~
;
_'L_ --'-;+/~1.~J
,
..
S~
i
:"i\ofai'e'.'---''''''''-'''''''''.-''''''
~'-, ..,
l
-j
+/-0.6
'-!"-'.""--';i~.:6'.'-'
Female"
RAc.E-i\NDfiisPANic-OR
LATINO.ORiGTN-.----r-------.
'~One Race ---
---~._----------!-.---- ..N.
Whne illone
'''"'aiaCk''cir'AfiliiinAmaMC8n'ai6'nii... 'Ame-aiiiri'"i"ildian"and'AJiiska'N'atrvs'aTons'"
..... _.._...,_ .._....._...
[~'_.
.,.j
,
.__.j .._'
Aiiia'n"/;iiOne
...'NatiW'Hawalian"'antf'other'Pa.-c'ificlsl8ndei'aici'ne:______
._..,_,.~,.,_.
""
'"i"'"
-4-_M __
~~~~_~~~~~,I~~~
..,__,._.,.".
__
.._."
_.__
''',._'
..,._.,
....._,1._ .....,__
~.!~
or..~~,__
.. _._ ..
.~_~
__
L..
+/-0.5
+1-1.8..
N
+/.().9
N
~,._",.-.I
'
.. ,,.,:tJ-1.~
..-J
..:,.+. /-2.6 _:.i
::~~tl~f-~~'~'~~"~ce)
-.-..
--'---.~,~--.,'+==--:~",..~l~.'.~l
White alone. not Hispanic
or Latino
.
i
+/-().6
;
"-018abliftY'Bi8i'u's~'''. '-'-'''''''-'::1
~i
..
iBa-rlng difficulty
. VI~on dlfflcuJty
'. CognitIve trifficuTty~'-"
- _, ,-, -(xj'.--l
.-,.---T-'-.----~-(x)'i
_.•. -..........
..T
•. - .• - •• (x).1
--"""--'''---.---'-'.T'''--~'''-' ,,-,w(X)' ":
-AmbUiatO"rt-a--iffiCUliY- -.------,
Self-care
difficulty
-lndepeiidenfiiV'ing-'diffiwny"""
..-".--
.. --~-
...---.-..
LX)
'I
(X)
~I'.":
Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. The degree of uncertainty for an estimate arising from sampling variability is
represented 1hltlugh the use of a margIn of error. The value shown here Is the 90 pel1;8Ot margin 9f error. The margin of error can be Interpreted
roughly as providIng a 90 percent probability that the interval defined by the estimate minus the margin of urror and thu estimate plus the margin of
error (the lower and upper confldenca bounds) contains the true value. In additIon to sampling variability. th.e ACS estimates are subject to
nonsampling error (for a dIscussIon of nonsampllng variability, see Accuracy of the Data). The effect of nonsampllng error Is not represented In these
tables.
The Census Bureau Introduced a new set of disability questions In the 2008 ACS questionnaIre. Accotdlngly, comparisons of dIsabilIty data from 2008
or later with oota from prior years are not recommended. For more Information on these questions and thalr evaluation In the 2006 AC$ Content Test,
see the Evaluation Report Covering DisabIlity.
3 of 4
12/14/2012
While the 2011 American Communtty Survey (ACS) data generally reflect the December 2009 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) definitIons of
metropolitan and rnicropolitan statistical areas; In certain Instances the names, rodes. and boundaries of the principal cities shown In ACS tab/as may
differ from the OMB definitions due to differences In the effectlva dates of the geographic entities.
Estimates of urban and rural population, housing units, and characteristics reflect boundaries of urban areas defined based on Census 2000 data.
Boundaries for urban areas have not been updated since Census 2000. As a result. data for urban and rural areas from the ACS do not necessarily
reflect the results of ongoing urbanization.
Source: U,S. Census Bureau, 2011 American CommunIty Survey
Explanation of Symbols:
1. An ••..••entry In the margin at error column Indicates that either no sample observations or too few sample observations were available to
compute a standard error end thus the margin of error, A statistical t85t Is not appropriate.
2. An '.' entry In the estimate column indicates that either no sample obsBfWtlons or too few sample observations were available to compute an
estimate, or a ratio of medians cannot be calculated because one or both of the median estimates falls In the lowest Interval or upper interval of an
open-ended distribution.
3. An '.' following a median estimate means the median falls In the lowest interval of an open-ended distribution .
.4, An '+' following a median estimate means the median falls in the upper interval of an operHtnded distribution.
5. An .m, entry In the margin of error column Indicates that the median falls In the lowest Interval or upper Interval of an open-ended dlstrlbutlon. A
statistical test Is not approprlate.
e. An
entry In the margin of error column indicates that the estimate is controlled. A statistical test .for sampling varlabinty Is not appropriate.
7. An 'N' entry In the estimate and margin of error columns Indicates tha1 data for this lJeolJraphic area cannol be displayed because the number of
sample cases Is too small.
8. An '(xy means that the estimate Is not applicable or not available.
-*-
Board Agenda Item
April 10, 2013
INFORMATION (w/presentation)
Park Authority Park Services Division: Oak Marr RECenter Expansion Operations Plan
The purpose of the information item is to provide details of the operations plan during
the expansion. This facility expansion will require the longest service interruption in the
history of the Park Authority with several critical milestones that will impact customers.
Phase 1 involves the closure of the fitness center for the entire length of the project (14
months), Phase 2 involves the closure of the natatorium for six weeks from
approximately September 2 through October 6. Primarily fitness programs and classes
will be impacted with fewer impacts to aquatic programs, rentals and other classes.
ENCLOSED DOCUMENTS:
None
STAFF:
Cindy Messinger, Acting Director
Sara Baldwin, Deputy Director/COO
David Bowden, Director, Planning and Development Division
Todd Johnson, Director, Park Operations Division
Barbara Nugent, Director, Park Services Division
Cindy Walsh, Director, Resource Management Division
Judy Pedersen, Public Information Office
Brian Laws, Operations Manager, Park Services Division
Steve Lewis, Business Operations Manager, Park Services Division
This page intentionally left blank.