Conway update

After the community meeting last night and a meeting with seniors today, I wanted to clear up some misperceptions by neighbors about where we are in the process of dealing with Conway.

Some people seem to believe that there is still a chance that Conway Rec Center could remain under the management of St. Paul Parks and Recreation. This is NOT the case.

The center WILL be privatized - or as Parks says, it will gain a service partner. BUT this does not mean that the community has no say in what will happen there. The Community Advisory Group is working with Parks to develop a plan for the recreation centers in this area that will assure that the activities that are currently housed at Conway will continue in the area.

But the Mayor has decided that this rec center is next in line to be privatized, along with McDonough Rec Center. That he has not changed his mind about this doesn't mean that our efforts to express how important Conway is to the neighborhood were useless. He is well aware that we are not happy with this decision, and he is well aware that we are unhappy with the process by which it was made. Once our discussions with Parks are completed with regard to Conway, we will revisit the issue of how the City deals with community input.

For the time-being, we remain determined that Conway continues as the center of the community, that neighbors have a say in what happens there in the future, and that it will be a more vibrant place than it has been.

The senior program is fairly guaranteed to remain at this location. All sports activities previously planned for this year will continue through this year...

We apologize if people left the community meeting that was held prior to the holidays still believing that we could change the Mayor's decision. He delayed action on his decision for six months - that was the effect we had - , but he has not changed his decision about finding a nonprofit partner to manage the facility. This is what was announced at the fall meeting - we apologize if it wasn't clear to everyone at that time.

Snow Plowing

From Public Works:

Last night we had our plows and sanders out on all arterial routes. Our crews were able to complete their routes and get a start on residential streets. Temps will remain mild, mostly above freezing, today through Tuesday.

Throughout today we are going to be plowing and salting in all districts on NS and EW residential streets. What we don’t finish on residential streets today we will complete tomorrow. We would appreciate residents moving their cars off the street. That would help our operation tremendously.

Tonight we will be out on the arterial streets salting as freezing rain is forecasted.

Park Answers to Community Questions - Conway

Note from D1 - this is a very long posting but contains important information from Parks about Conway.

* Please Note - Throughout this document the word “privatization” is used by community members in questions about the future of the facility. The more appropriate terminology is “service partnerships” or “service partners” – as this more accurately describes the city/partner relationship and future status of the facility compared to “privatizing”. Questions have not been changed/and or altered to reflect this distinction, but all answers will use this more accurate terminology.

Q. - What is the mission and purpose of Parks and Recreation?

A. - Mission

To help make Saint Paul the most livable city in America, Saint Paul Parks and Recreation will facilitate the creation of active lifestyles, vibrant places, and a vital environment.

Vision Statement

Saint Paul Parks and Recreation will make Saint Paul the most livable city in America by:

• Responding creatively to change
• Innovating with every decision
• Connecting the entire city

Q. - How does the mission of a rec center change with privatization?

A. – The mission does not change when service partnerships are implemented at facilities. The alternative to service partnerships is full facility closure, which would have more of an impact on the community and move us farther away fromthe mission than finding a suitable partner to maintain services to the community that our Department can no longer financially support.  

Note from D1 – this answer refers to rec centers that have been selected for service partnerships. It does not mean that all rec centers either have an option to be closed or to become partnership sites. Parks has a System Plan that seeks to reduce the number of buildings that it is responsible for maintaining. Privatization or Service Partnerships are one way that it uses to get to that reduced number of buildings. Those buildings that are sites of these partnerships remain city property. The costs for maintaining them are shifted to the private partners.

Q. - What is the end goal of privatization?

A. – There are multiple goals for implementing service partnerships, the first being to avoid full facility closure. Service partnerships enable the City to ensure certain services (as prioritized by the community) are maintained in the community. The partnerships also help to reduce the financial burden, which creates more flexibility within the Parks and Recreation Department to continue transitioning to the more successful activity-based recreation model. This new model has demonstrated positive results over the last four years and has helped refocus programming alternatives and facilities with a quality-over-quantity approach. This approach has improved the level of staffing and options for residents, while capitalizing on strong community partnerships that also help deliver community services.

Q. - Why is Parks and Rec the first place to cut when budget problems hit?

A. – The City makes decisions based on citywide priorities and all departments are generally affected by budget reductions when they occur. Although some departments may be affected more so than others in any given year, the current administration and Council places a great deal of emphasis on having quality Parks and Recreation services. This is clearly evidenced by the amount of investment the City puts into the system each year and why Parks and Recreation, along with Police and Fire, are part of the City’s “Big 3 Departments” for general fund support. From a national perspective, “Parks and Recreation spending per capita” in Saint Paul is consistently in the top-10 for cities of similar size throughout the country.

Q. - How and why did privatization come up?

A. – Service Partnerships have been successfully utilized by the department over the last 20 years. Faced with additional budget reductions over the past seven years, the Parks and Recreation Department has used the model established by the successful partnership with the Twin Cities Boys and Girls Club to facilitate additional service partnerships. The Twin Cities Boys and Girls Club is a service partner at three former recreation center facilities, located on the East (Sackett) and West Side (Belvidere), as well as at our facility at Valley/Mount Airy.  This model is being looked to for changes at Conway and McDonough as part of the 2013 budget.

Note from D1: see the note above. Parks has developed its System Plan as a response to declining funding from the state to local municipalities (Local Government Aid or LGA). It is a strategy to deal with declining or stagnant funding in light of increasing costs. The majority (~85%) of Parks budget is in personnel. This is true of most nonprofit organizations.

Q. - What evidence is there that privatization increases participation?

A. – Service Partnerships are not intended to dramatically increase participation.  Rather, the partnerships are meant to ensure services the community wants/needs are maintained while allowing the department to invest in a quality-over-quantity approach to improve overall programming. This quality-over-quantity approach has helped to dramatically increase participation in programming over the last six years at both City operated facilities and through our mobile recreation program (activity based recreation that takes place at various city owned and non-city owned facilities throughout the city).  In collaboration with service partners like the Twin Cities Boys and Girls Club, Blackhawks Soccer, and Joy of the People Soccer, participation has increased exponentially at the recreation facilities they manage because of the services now being provided.

Q. - What evidence is there that privatization increases or at least maintains access for the full demographics of an area?

A. – Service Partnerships will be monitored and reviewed regularly to ensure the services being delivered are meeting the expectations laid out by the Parks and Recreation Department. Every attempt will be made to ensure the service partner selected will be able to provide access to the facility and potential programs for the entire local community.

Q. - Does privatization shift costs from all property owners to paying participants?

A. – The intent of a service partnership is to help the city manage costly building expenses, such as utilities and long-term maintenance. These costs are eventually taken over by the service partner and depending on the types of services provided, there may be costs associated with participation. During the community process, the needs and wants of the local community will be reviewed and discussed to help shape expectations of any future service partner. Similar to the current structure of recreation centers, the Parks and Recreation Department envisions a mix of participant fees and low-to-no cost programming/general facility access options for the community. 

Note from D1: The first Conway CAG meeting resulted in identifying access as a community priority so that continuing to provide free services to the community will be included in the Request for Proposals (RFP) that the CAG will help to develop as we seek appropriate partners.

Q. - Who benefits from privatization?

A. – Service partnerships provide benefits to multiple stakeholders. The alternative to a service partnership is full facility closure, so the community is benefiting by still having access to the facility and services. The Parks and Recreation Department budget benefits because it is now able to reduce expenses associated with operating and maintaining a facility while maintaining public access to the facility. The new service partner also benefits by being able to operate out of a facility that is located in a park space with a built-in neighborhood and service demand. Ultimately, service partnerships enable services to remain in a facility that due to budget constraints may have had to be completely closed as an alternative.

NOTE from D1: see first note. This statement is a recognition that Conway and McDonough will either be privatized (i.e., find a service partner) or they will be closed. The community is committed to keeping Conway open. The unanswered, perhaps the unasked, question is why these two rec centers were chosen for private partnerships at this time.

Q. - How does privatization work?

A. – The first step to initiating a service partnership is to evaluate what types of services and programming are currently being offered at the facility and whether those services are what the community would like to see continued. Based on that review, expectations are developed and a solicitation is initiated to determine interest of potential service partners. Following the review of the responses to the solicitation, an agreement is developed with the service partner that outlines expectations for an agreed upon term.

NOTE from D1: How robust this decision-making process is will be dependent on the accuracy and robustness of the data upon which the decisions are made. There continues to be some concern from the community as to the nature of the data for Conway (see first meeting summary).

Q. - How do you define users of a recreation center? Paying participants or simply those who make use of the facilities?

A. – The Parks and Recreation Department defines users as any person who visits/participates/attends a facility. Different automated systems help track whether the use is simply “drop-in” or is tied to a specific program/purpose.

NOTE from D1: Tracking users appears to be a significant problem.

Q. - What is the vision for Conway Rec Center? (what will be effect on current programs?)

A. – The vision for Saint Paul’s entire recreation system is for it to become a 21^st Century system that is sustainable for many years to come. In order to accomplish this vision, the Parks and Recreation Department needs to balance community needs and wants with the current and future financial realities facing the system. Ideally, following the community process, a service partner could take over the operation of the facility and maintain programs/services the community needs while helping to reduce some financial burden the Parks and Recreation Department is currently facing. The community process being initiated will help to determine which programs and services remain at the facility.

NOTE from D1: See the first meeting summary of our discussion about constraints.

Q. - How do we maintain facilities and security at facilities?

A. – The Parks and Recreation Department is responsible for maintaining the City’s recreation facilities. Security at facilities is managed by the Parks and Recreation Department with cooperation from the Police Department in matters where severe security issues or crimes are committed. Most facilities are also equipped with entry and fire alarm systems and some have security cameras as well.

NOTE from D1: At the first CAG meeting, keeping an eye on activities outside the building will be included in the RFP as a partnership requirement.

Q. - How do we hold Parks and Recreation accountable?

A. – The Parks and Recreation Department will ensure any new service partnership implemented at Conway is reviewed to make sure it is meeting the expectations set forth in the agreement. If the community feels the new service partner is not meeting expectations, the Parks and Recreation Department will work with the partner to correct the issue or hold them accountable to the agreement.

NOTE from D1: Developing a system of accountability is also a part of drafting the RFP, as based on our first CAG meeting discussions.

Q. - How do we address the money/budget issue?

A. – Steps have been taken over the last six years to address the new economic reality we are in. The former Parks and Recreation system was not economically sustainable so the Parks and Recreation Department initiated a series of fundamental changes focused both on the revenue and the spending side of its budget. Although a number of these decisions have meant a great deal of change at neighborhood facilities, the Parks and Recreation System continues to become stronger and more able to respond to changing trends and growing service demand.

NOTE from D1: The assumption is that the money/budget issue (declining revenue and increasing costs) is here to stay. The Parks System Plan is the strategy that Parks is using to address it.

Q. - Where does the money go that is saved by privatization?

A. – Money saved by a service partnership is captured as part of a reduction for the annual City budget. Any additional savings is re-invested into staffing and programs throughout the recreation system.

NOTE from D1: At the first CAG meeting, Parks officials stated that captured savings would remain within the Eastern District of the Parks System.

Q. - What will be the effect on Conway (and other rec centers) of new transportation opportunities that are coming (e.g. Gateway Corridor)?

A. – The service partnership at Conway would have little effect on future transportation opportunities as the facility would remain open and operational.

NOTE from D1: We feel that Parks has not understood the question – the question asks how the transportation changes will affect Conway use, not the other way around. The Gateway Corridor development will create a more significant transportation hub within two blocks of Conway Rec Center. We expect (over the next 15-20 years) to see increased development at both SunRay and near White Bear and Old Hudson where there will be transit stations for the Bus Rapid Transit line. This will also spur more activity along bus routes that feed into this new connection. At the very least, these developments will increase access to the Rec Center from outside the immediate community.

Q. - What services does this community need?

A. – The Parks and Recreation Department has data on what programs and attendance has been in the past, but the community process being initiated will help show what is needed.

NOTE from D1: Again, the community continues to have concern about the accuracy of the data of past programming and attendance.

Q. - Why is a joint rec center and library complex what Payne-Phalen needs, but not this neighborhood?

A. – The Parks and Recreation Department makes decisions based on the entire Parks and Recreation system. The Payne Maryland facility took almost a decade of planning and resource compilation. Both the Public Library and the Parks and Recreation Department had a growing service need in that neighborhood, which would not have been met with the previous facilities.  The Saint Paul Public Library already has plans in the works to renovate rather than replace the library at Sun Ray.

NOTE from D1: There has been limited discussion between the community and the library system, however, there has been better data collection of use and programming at the library. As the siting of the Payne Maryland facility was being finalized, the D1 Council advocated for Conway Park to be the eastside location, in large part because of ease of access issues (see comments above about transportation and Conway).

Q. - What costs will there be for neighbors?

A. – Cost structure will remain largely the same and depending on the service partner participant and/or program fees will be reviewed as part of the expectation discussion.

Summary of Conway Recreation Center Programming Breakdown

Current Programs

Athletics – field use

·         6 basketball teams – for 2012/2013 season/122 participants

            Practices 6-7:45pm M-F

·         9 football teams – for 2012 season/151 participants

·          4 baseball – for 2012 season/48 participants

School age youth – Rec. Check room/Gym use

·         Summerblast – June through August/85 participants

·         Rec. Check – September through June/28 participants

·         Judo – Youth/17 participants

·         Tot Tumbling/10 participants

·         D1 also held youth cooking classes at Conway this year

Drop in activities – gym/meeting room use

·         Open Gym – Monday through Friday 3-6 PM

·         Girls group – partnership with Girls Scouts and Ramsey County Health

·         Cheerleading – August through October, 2012/30 participants

·         Fitness room

Special activities – facility use/gym/meetingroom/craft room/foyer

·         Parks and Recreation special events:

      - Field trips to Base Camp, Twins and Saints games, RBI World Series at Target Field, Get Outdoors Day at Phalen Regional Park, Como and Great River Water Parks

·         Rec. Check Family Night

·         East Area Halloween Party (over 300 participants)

·         Artmobile (Partnership with Eastside Arts Council)

Community events – facility use/gym/meeting room

·         National Night Out 2012 (over 500 in attendance)

·         Host to community meetings Health Screening (January 2013) Tax preparation (Annually every Wednesday January – April 15^th)

·         Rentals - including 3M Men's Basketball Tuesday and Thursday 12-1PM

·         Added by D1 – monthly D1 Land Use Committee meetings and at least 2 community meetings per year

General park use – outdoor amenities

·         Community gardens (seasonal, 15 plots)

·         Outdoor basketball court (April – November)

·         Tennis courts (April – November)

·         Play area (all year – weather permitting)

·         Walking trail

·         Ball fields for pick-up games

·         Skating (small hockey rink & general rink) – seasonal

NOTE from D1: Numbers from the Community Education Senior Program are not included in this listing. It is a partnership with Parks, but not a Parks program. There were 356 participants and 2722 total visits in 2012. We also note that the numbers of children accessing free meals during the summer at Conway were far higher than those for children using Conway during the summer. They also were significantly higher than the numbers for Battle Creek Rec over the same period.

"Minutes" of first Conway Cmty Advisory Group Mtg

Note to Community - this is a summary of a two-hour conversation among the advisory group members. Please feel free to comment, or to contact the District 1 office for more information.
Note to CAG members - if you have additions or corrections to this summary, you can add your comments below.

Thursday, January 10, 2013

Members present – Kris Gjerde (chair), Ebony Young, Clara Ware, Christopher Dollar-Simmons, Erika Martin, Sandy Rosbacka, Stacey Van Patten, Gwen Peterson (Parks), Kathy Korum (Parks), Kathy Lantry (City Council); (excused members – Larry Lawrey and Mike Hahm (Parks))

Support members present – Ellen Biales (City Council), Eric Thompson (Parks), Betsy Leach (D1 and scribe)

Purpose of the Conway CAG – This group will define the needs of the community for recreation services at the Conway Rec Center in order to advise the City on how best to make use of this vital community asset and select a successful partner.

Results of Meeting 1:

The goal of the CAG is two-fold: 1) to act as a steward of the current programming existing at Conway Rec Center so that it remains in and available to the community; and 2) to develop a Request for Proposals from potential partners to assure programming at this location that will meet the needs of residents of both sexes and from a wide range of ages and economic status, and that is culturally and socially appropriate. With respect to 2), the CAG will evaluate submissions to the RFP and provide a recommendation to the City. The programming at this location will have a recreational focus, assure public access, and provide leadership development among participants. The programming at Conway Rec Center should nurture our youth, support our families, and honor our elders. The Conway Center will represent the heart of this community.

How we got to these results:

The meeting began with introducing the members to each other. This step helps us to understand the resources and perspectives that each member brings to the group (parents and grandparents of youth participants, neighbors, coach/booster club leader, apartment complex management, senior programming provider, parks staff, etc.). We also established ground rules for the group that are based on respect for the diversity of our opinions and the need to finish our work within the 6 month timeframe. We also acknowledged that important issues that will be raised that may not be immediately relevant to our task. These issues will be placed on the agenda for the district council to address in other forums.

Establishing the background – Parks presented several sets of data about usage of the Conway Rec Center relative to other facilities. A summary of these data and responses from Parks to community questions that were raised at the November 26 meeting will be provided in a subsequent blog posting (www.district1council.blogspot.com). The members questioned how the data were collected, their accuracy, and their relevance to the discussion. We all acknowledge that decisions must be made with the best, most relevant data available. There are limitations on the data we have about usage at Conway Rec Center.

Acknowledging the constraints – We are operating under certain economic, political and physical constraints. The Parks Department has had level or declining funding over the past decade. It has developed a system plan that looks to reduce the number of recreation facilities it needs to staff and maintain; approximately 85% of Parks budget is for staffing – the more facilities, the more staffing is needed. So Parks has been using a model of establishing service partnerships that provide staffing/programming, maintenance of facilities, payment of utilities at those facilities and “rent” at facilities. These partnerships have been variably successful. City Council outlined how the city budgeting process occurs – with a strong mayor system of governing, the mayor develops a budget, the city council can recommend shifts of the finite pot of money, but departments manage their budgets according to the mayor’s priorities and in acknowledgement of operational needs. So a major constraint for the CAG’s work is that the mayor has said that for the Parks system to remain vital, Conway and McDonough need to find partners that can provide the funding to support their existence and public programming at their locations.

A further constraint is that a partnership must meet certain requirements based on the City Charter. The programming must have a recreational focus, be provided by a non-profit entity and must provide public access, because the facility remains public property.

Finally, partners bring their own constraints. Nonprofits are mission-driven – they must do work that advances their mission, not someone else’s mission. It will be incumbent on the group when reviewing RFP responses to assure compatibility between the partner’s mission, the mission of Parks, and the objectives of the community. Additionally, if a nonprofit is funding the maintenance of a facility, it needs the space to do its work. Parks outlined this constraint when asked if a partner could be found that would permit all existing programming to remain at Conway and simply add their activities to those. Therefore, it will be impossible to retain all current programming AT THIS FACILITY when a partner is brought in. However, the CAG is committed to finding places within the community where all existing programming can continue.

What is important to the community (community “constraints”) – The community wants to assure that there is a way to hold any partner accountable. We need to build into the RFP what the community requires, including accountability measures. The community should be a part of the evaluation of a partner’s accountability. The RFP must outline the programming that the community wants but not be so restrictive that there is no choice among those who submit a proposal. We need a robust pool of potential partners.

We should think in terms of who is in the community, who is using the facility now, who is not using the facility but could be served, what resources we have already in place to meet the needs and what resources need to be brought in. We need to think about what the ultimate outcome is for recreational services. There is an identified need in this area for youth based services, including among youth over 16 years of age. But it is important that the facility address the full lifespan, therefore retaining the senior program at this location will be important – it is unlikely that youth programming will conflict for space needs with senior programming even though it is unlikely that a partner who provides youth programming will also provide senior programming. Most youth programming will be during after-school hours. But Community Ed is already a successful partner for senior programming and this programming occurs during school hours – it is a priority to keep this partnership vital.

The likeliest source of conflict is among different kinds of sports with competing demands for space inside the facility and in the fields. A range of sports activities is an important community priority, but the group recognizes that the activities can be distributed across other parks (how can this also address concerns at Eastview, for example?). But the main priority is in developing youth potential and sports are only one way to do this. The group sets as a high priority that a partner be fundamentally in the business of developing the potential and well-being of our community members.

The partnership must provide programming that is sustainable, effective and accessible.

What we will do at the next meeting:

Does the goal need to be clarified or more focused? Do we have data that helps us further define community needs?

How do we prioritize programming needs at Conway and in the broader area?

Begin drafting an RFP that addresses community needs.              

Upcoming Meetings:

Community update meeting at D1 January Board Meeting – January 28, 6:30p at Conway Rec

NEXT CONWAY CAG MEETING – January 31, 6p at Conway Rec

Other scheduled CCAG meetings – February 11, 6p at Conway Rec; February 21, 6p at Conway Rec

Community update meeting at D1 February Board Meeting – February 25, 6:30p at Conway Rec

FINAL NOTES: 1) if community members or other community groups want to meet with staff or CAG members to discuss the process, the goals, and/or the community needs, please contact the District 1 office to set up a meeting (district1council@aol.com or district1cpc@aol.com or 651.578.7600). 2) a youth advisory group is being established by Parks and community partners. You can contact Kathy.Korum@ci.stpaul.mn.us for more information.

AnyTime Fitness under new Management - deals to you.

Anytime Fitness St. Paul will open its doors to the public all day on Thursday the 17^th for a Free workout and to celebrate the 1 year anniversary and new ownership!  Prizes for new Members goal setting  and free Enrollment is offered to help get the East side Healthy.

“Our goal is to distinguish our self through customer service and Member engagement” said Tim Skelly the new owner of anytime fitness St. Paul. Tim goes on to say “We offer custom 90 day challenges with money back guarantees.”

The addition of the Silver Sneakers Program has also given local seniors a close alternative for their health and wellness.  Silver Sneakers Participants have full access to the gym including 24 hour classes.

To celebrate its 1 year New Location Anniversary, Anytime Fitness is offering the East side $0 enrollment and personal training to the first 20 members who join.

Pawn America prepares to open on Suburban

The new Pawn America store on Suburban Avenue, in the old Suburban car lot development, is preparing to open within days. They are looking to see if there are people interested in being first customers at this new facility.

If you are interested - and wanting to get a preview of the newly designed interior - you can contact Chuck Armstrong at 952-646-3780.

(We've come a long way since this photo was taken!!)