HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021_10_19 CC PKTCity Council
City of Brookings
Meeting Agenda - Final
Brookings City Council
Brookings City & County
Government Center
520 3rd St., Suite 230
Brookings, SD 57006
Phone: (605) 692-6281
Fax: (605) 692-6907
"We are an inclusive, diverse, connected community that fuels the creative class, embraces sustainability
and pursues a complete lifestyle. We are committed to building a bright future through dedication,
generosity and authenticity. Bring your dreams!"
Council Chambers5:30 PMTuesday, October 19, 2021
Study Session
The City of Brookings is committed to providing a high quality of life for its citizens and fostering a diverse
economic base through innovative thinking, strategic planning, and proactive, fiscally responsible municipal
management.
5:30 PM STUDY SESSION
1. Call to Order / Pledge of Allegiance.
2. Record of Council Attendance.
3. Action to approve the agenda.
4. Open Forum.
At this time, any member of the public may request time on the agenda for an item not
listed. Items are typically scheduled for the end of the meeting; however, very brief
announcements or invitations will be allowed at this time.
5.ID 21-0502 Presentation on the Park Master Plan
Memo
Presentation
Park Master Plan - draft
Appendix 1 - Action Plan
Appendix 2 - Park Inventory
Appendix 3 - Survey
Appendix 4 - Policy Review
Appendix 5 - CIP Worksheet
Attachments:
Page 1 City of Brookings
October 19, 2021City Council Meeting Agenda - Final
6.ID 21-0503 Presentation, Discussion, and Possible Action on the 2022 Outside
Agency Application.
Memo
2021 Funding Recommendation
United Way Rubric
Attachments:
7. City Council member introduction of topics for future discussion.
Any Council Member may request discussion of any issue at a future meeting only.
Items cannot be added for action at this meeting. A motion and second is required
stating the issue, requested outcome, and time. A majority vote is required.
8. Adjourn.
Brookings City Council: Oepke Niemeyer, Mayor; Nick Wendell, Deputy Mayor
Council Members Wayne Avery, Patty Bacon, Leah Brink, Joey Collins, Holly Tilton Byrne,
Council Staff:
Paul M. Briseno, City Manager Steven Britzman, City Attorney Bonnie Foster, City Clerk
View the City Council Meeting Live on the City Government Access Channel 9.
Rebroadcast Schedule: Wednesday 1:00pm/Thursday 7:00pm/Friday 9:00pm/Saturday 1:00pm
The complete City Council agenda packet is available on the city website: www.cityofbrookings.org
Assisted Listening Systems (ALS) are available upon request by contacting (605) 692-6281. If you require
additional assistance, alternative formats, and/or accessible locations consistent with the Americans with
Disabilities Act, please contact Susan Rotert, City Human Resources Director and ADA Coordinator at (605)
692-6281 at least three working days prior to the meeting.
Public Comment can be submitted: 1) via eComment on InSite (https://cityofbrookings.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx
), 2) Email your comments the City Clerk (bfoster@cityofbrookings-sd.gov ), or 3) participate via Zoom (contact the
City Clerk for login access bfoster@cityofbrookings-sd.gov ). Thank you.
Page 2 City of Brookings
City of Brookings
Staff Report
Brookings City & County
Government Center, 520
Third Street
Brookings, SD 57006
(605) 692-6281 phone
(605) 692-6907 fax
File #:ID 21-0502,Version:2
Presentation on the Park Master Plan
Summary:
Pros Consulting Inc.will present a summary of findings and recommendations contained within the
final version of the Parks Master Plan.
Attachments:
Memo
Presentation
Park Master Plan - draft
Appendix 1 - Action Plan
Appendix 2 - Park Inventory
Appendix 3 - Survey
Appendix 4 - Policy Review
Appendix 5 - CIP Worksheet
City of Brookings Printed on 10/14/2021Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
City Council Agenda Memo .
From: Dusty Rodiek, Parks, Recreation & Forestry Director
Council Meeting: October 19, 2021
Subject: Parks & Recreation Master Plan Presentation
Person(s) Responsible: Dusty Rodiek, Parks, Recreation & Forestry Director
Summary:
Pros Consulting Inc. will present a summary of findings and recommendations
contained within the final version of the Parks Master Plan. This document was
presented to the Park Board.
Background:
In August of 2020 Pros Consulting Inc. was selected to conduct a Parks and Recreation
Master Plan for the City of Brookings. This process included the development of a
comprehensive inventory, analysis of operational and financial practices, engaging
public input to identify forecasted needs and the creation of implementation strategies.
Specific items included in the study, but not limited to, are:
Needs Assessment
Assets Inventory and Level of Services Analysis
Management and Operations Analysis
Services Assessment
Cost Recovery Policy
Programming Plan
Partnership Policy
Maintenance Standards Plan
To achieve these objectives, the consultant collected and analyzed data to develop a
clear set of goals for the City’s park system, open space, recreation facilities and
program development for the next ten years.
Item Details:
Pros Consulting Inc. will present a summary of findings and recommendations
contained within the final version of the Parks Master Plan.
The related Appendices to the document contain the detailed system inventory, public
survey data, level of service charts, a robust action plan as well as a comprehensive
CIP budget plan.
Legal Consideration:
None
Strategic Plan Consideration
This item is included in the Safe, Inclusive and Connected Community heading of the
Strategic Plan.
Financial Consideration:
None
Supporting Documentation:
Presentation
Park Master Plan - draft
Appendix 1 – Action Plan
Appendix 2 – Park Inventory
Appendix 3 – Survey
Appendix 4 – Policy Review
Appendix 5 – CIP Worksheet
•Parks and Recreation
Master Plan Process
•Key Themes
•Key Recommendations
•Capital Improvement
Plan
•Open Discussion
Agenda
The Parks & Recreation Master Plan Process
Where Are We Today?
Site and facility review
Benchmark analysis
Recreation/ sports programs and
services assessments
Levels of services standards
GIS mapping
Where Are We Going Tomorrow?
Community engagement needs
analysis
Statistically-valid survey
Demographics & recreation trends
analysis review
Staffing and maintenance review
How Do We Get There?
Needs prioritization
Capital development planning
Financial planning
Funding and revenue planning
Strategic action plan implementation
= Completed
Themes of the Master Plan
•Trails, trails, trails … community loves its trails and wants more of them, as well as completion of the Bike Trail.
•Community appreciates the variety of park experiences the City provides and contribution to Brookings’ quality-of-life.
•Take -care of what we already own.
•Need for additional indoor recreation and aquatics.
•Activate the parks through more programming.
•Year -round indoor programming.
•Need for additional funding for capital replacements.
•Value the many partnerships with SDSU, the School District, and Sports Groups.
Level of Service &
Mapping
•Recommended Level of Service is calculated off Current Population
and 5-Year Projection, NRPA Standards, Community Survey,
Benchmark Communities & Best Practice.
•Each park classification / definition has a unique experience and
length of stay for users.
•Brookings is meeting the community’s need in developed and total
park acreage.
•Largest need is Indoor Recreation and Aquatic Space.
Methodology and Findings
GIS Mapping: All
Parks
Recommendations
Recommendations
Community Values Model
Vision Statement
“Brookings is a vibrant and desirable community providing attractive and well-
maintained parks, trails, recreation facilities, programs, and customer service to
the community, while maintaining safe, accessible, and healthy natural park
surroundings.”
Mission Statement
“Provide great parks, trails, recreation facilities, and programs that benefit all
residents and visitors through enjoyable experiences that make living in Brookings
the community of choice.”
Action
Plan
•Strategies -major ideas or philosophies to implement
•Tactics -helps achieve each strategy
•Group Responsible -person or persons to oversee tactics
•Start Date -when to initiate tactics
•Performance Measure -indicates desire objectives
Initiative #1 –Well Maintained and Safe Parks
Our vision for park land is to create the correct balance of park space dedicated to
neighborhood parks, community parks and trails across the city to ensure a balance
of active parks and natural preserved areas.
•Opportunities for self-directed recreation are provided through an
extensive system of well-maintained parks, trails, bike paths, natural
areas, and accessible open spaces.
•Neighborhood Parks and Community Parks are activated through
effective park design and amenities that bring a sense of place,
support community recreation needs and create positive experiences
for people of all ages.
•Trails are connected through an easy-to -understand bike pathway
system of trails and on street sidewalks that allow any user to walk,
run or bike in a safe environment.
Park Recommendations
•Brookings Parks and Recreation maintains and operates a wide variety of amenities in parks both year-round and seasonally to serve residents and visitors of all age groups in a positive and safe environment.
•Park assets are maintained in a proper lifecycle manner to encourage positive use and year-round use through appropriate maintenance and replacement schedules as needed.
•Consistent signage to educate users about parks, wayfinding, safety, and trails are provided.
•Establish a standard for land in the system that is left in a natural state.
Park Recommendations
Initiative #2 –High Performing Park and Facility Management
Brookings Park and Recreation staff achieves high levels of community support and
satisfaction and is governed and managed in an efficient and cost-effective manner
that provides great value from taxes and user fees.
•Park and Recreation Board Polices and By-laws are updated to follow
responsible management of the park and recreation system.
•The Park and Recreation Department maintains effective interagency
relationships with the Public Works Department and the City
Manager’s Office.
•Updated pricing policies and partnership polices are established to
create equity between partners and user groups.
Park and Facility Management
•Key performance indicators will be established for all operational
divisions within the park and recreation system to demonstrate
efficiency and effectiveness.
•Use technology to enhance effectiveness and efficiency of the
Department will be instituted at a higher level of impact to support
the user experience with the Departments services and amenities.
•Create a volunteer program to assist with park maintenance.
•Ensure staffing of park maintenance is aligned with community
expectations.
Park and Facility Management
Initiative #3 –Enhance Programs, Services and Experiences
Brookings Park and Recreation vision for programs and services is to activate more
park and recreation facilities that serve a wider audience and provide residents the
ability to connect to the system.
•Consider adding a total of two (2) to four (4) additional core programs
into the system that could include: summer camps, special events,
adult fitness and wellness, environmental education, adventure
programs, people with disabilities, life-long learning, STEM, and
programs for active adults.
•Develop a feasibility study for an indoor aquatic and community
center facility that serves a multitude of core programs that can
support the core programs outlined in the most cost-effective
manner.
Programs and Services
•Park amenity utilization, cost recovery and user satisfaction of
amenities and facilities are optimized through scheduling, staffing and
amenity access and through effective fee polices.
•A cost-of-service study is conducted on any new programs or facilities
to determine the cost of operations and cost effectiveness of each
program and amenity operated.
•An effective marketing plan is created to enhance the use of all public
mediums to encourage more community awareness, use, and
appreciation for program services.
Programs and Services
Initiative #4 –Enhance Financial Management
Maximize the value of all parks and recreation facilities to achieve the highest value
of use and return on investment.
•Develop business plans for all revenue producing facilities within the
system to maximize the use, efficiency of programs and services,
staffing and operations to reduce the need for tax support.
•A long-term funding strategy and financial plan for capital investment
and reinvestment is developed and implemented.
•Consider a Business Improvement District downtown to assist in the
maintenance cost.
Financial Management
•Consider the creation of a Park Foundation to increase capital and
operational dollars to support the system as a strategic partner.
•Evaluate land leases on excess park property for commercial
investment to generate revenue to offset existing operational costs.
•Consider a land dedication ordinance on new development to cover
capital costs in lieu of park land.
•Consider an impact fee on new development to cover capital costs for
future city-wide attractions.
Financial Management
Capital Improvement
Plan
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN | BROOKINGS, SD
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
1.Based on the findings of the Park and Facility
Assessment, estimates for probable costs for Park
improvements were developed for inclusion in the
Parks Department 5-year and 10-year Capital
Improvement Plan. Costs developed are based on
local and regional historical cost data.
2.Improvements were organized into a three-tier plan,
identifying improvements as one of the following
categories:
•Critical/Sustainable Alternative
•Expanded Services Alternative
•Visionary Alternative
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN | BROOKINGS, SD
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
1.Critical/Sustainable Alternative
Prioritized spending within existing budget targets and focuses on deferred
maintenance and lifecycle replacement of assets and amenities within the
existing parks system. The intention of the alternative is to refocus and make
the most of existing resources with the primary goal being for the City to
maintain high quality services.
EXAMPLE: COURT RESURFACING
EXAMPLE: PLAYGROUND UPGRADES
Representative Projects Added to the CIP:
Arrowhead Park -Court Reconstruction
Dakota Nature Park -Trail Repairs
Lions Park -Playground Equipment Replacement
Sexauer Park -Update Park Signage
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN | BROOKINGS, SD
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
2.Expanded Services Alternative
Extra services or capital improvement that should be undertaken when
additional funding is available. This includes strategically enhancing and
renovating existing parks and facilities to better meet the park and
recreational needs of residents that would require additional operational or
capital funding.
EXAMPLE: TRAIL EXPANSION OR PAVING
EXAMPLE: NEW PARKS OR FEATURES
Representative Projects Added to the CIP:
Sexauer Park -Bike Trail Extension
Splash Park
Pickleball Courts
Community Garden Site II
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN | BROOKINGS, SD
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
3.Visionary Alternative
Represents the complete set of services and facilities desired by the
community. It is fiscally unconstrained but can help provide policy guidance
by illustrating the ultimate goals of the parks and recreation system and by
providing a long-range look to address future needs and deficiencies.
Visionary Alternatives address complete renovations of aging parks and
facilities and the development of new parks and facilities. Funding for
visionary projects would be derived from partnerships, private investments
and new tax dollars.EXAMPLE: DAKOTA NATURE PARK
EXAMPLE: BOB SHELDON RENOVATIONS
Representative Projects Added to the CIP:
New Indoor Community/Recreation Center
New Sledding Hill
New Miracle Field
New Ballfields (4)
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN | BROOKINGS, SD
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
The proposed additions to the 5-and 10-year CIP
that were identified through the Park and Facility
Assessment include approximately 48 new
improvements across the Park and Recreation
System, totaling approximately $2.5 million in
new Critical/Sustainable Improvements, $850,000
in new Expanded Services, and $34.8 million in
potential Visionary Investments.
Open Discussion: Any Questions?
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to thank the many citizens, staff and community groups who provided extensive community input
for the development of this Parks and Recreation Master Plan. The efforts of this community will continue to
ensure the success of the Brookings Parks, Recreation & Forestry Department.
Project Staff
Dusty Rodiek, Parks, Recreation & Forestry Director
Darren Hoff, Recreation Manager
Stacey Claussen, Recreation Manager
Allen Kruse, Parks & Forestry Superintendent
Ronda May, Office Manager
City Council and City Manager
Oepke “Ope” Niemeyer, Mayor
Paul Briseno, City Manager
Patty Bacon
Leah Brink
Wayne Avery
Joey Collins
Holly Tilton Byrne
Nick Wendell, Deputy Mayor
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Steve Berseth, Vice Chair
Andrea Hogie
Ashley Ragsdale
Jay Larsen
John Maynes
Erika Saunders, Chair
Doug Smith
Isaac Schulte, High School Student
Carson Cody, College Student
Planning Team
In Association with:
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................... 1
1.1 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 MASTER PLAN GOALS ................................................................................................................................................................ 2
1.3 PROJECT PROCESS..................................................................................................................................................................... 2
1.4 CURRENT PARKS MAP & DEFINITION OF PLANNING AREA ........................................................................................................... 3
1.5 VISION, MISSION, AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES ............................................................................................................................. 5
1.6 ISSUES AND THEMES ................................................................................................................................................................. 6
1.7 KEY RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................................................................................... 6
1.8 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................................................ 8
CHAPTER TWO – BROOKINGS PROFILE ...................................................................................... 9
2.1 DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS ......................................................................................................................................................... 9
2.2 RECREATIONAL TRENDS ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................................... 18
2.3 BENCHMARK ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................................................... 35
CHAPTER THREE – COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ....................................................................... 44
3.1 KEY STAKEHOLDER AND FOCUS GROUP SUMMARY ................................................................................................................... 44
3.2 STATISTICALLY-VALID NEEDS ASSESSMENT SURVEY .................................................................................................................. 49
3.3 ELECTRONIC SURVEY ............................................................................................................................................................... 66
CHAPTER FOUR – PARKS, FACILITIES, AND PROGRAM ANALYSIS ............................................. 70
4.1 PARK CLASSIFICATIONS .......................................................................................................................................................... 70
4.2 PARKS AND FACILITIES ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................................................................... 77
4.3 LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS ................................................................................................................................................ 82
4.4 GIS MAPPING ......................................................................................................................................................................... 85
4.5 PROGRAM ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................................................................................... 112
4.6 FACILITY / AMENITY PRIORITY RANKINGS ............................................................................................................................. 133
4.7 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN ............................................................................................................................................... 136
CHAPTER FIVE – OPERATIONAL REVIEW AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS ...................................... 137
5.1 OPERATIONAL REVIEW .......................................................................................................................................................... 137
5.2 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................................................... 140
5.3 FUNDING AND REVENUE STRATEGIES ..................................................................................................................................... 149
CHAPTER SIX – ACTION PLAN ............................................................................................... 152
6.1 KEY RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................................................................................... 152
CHAPTER SEVEN – CONCLUSION ........................................................................................... 154
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
iii
Appendices:
Appendix 1 – Action Plan
Appendix 2 – Detailed Park Assessment
Appendix 3 – Statistically-Valid Needs Assessment Survey
Appendix 4 – Partnership Assessment Findings
Appendix 5 – Detailed 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
1
CHAPTER ONE – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 INTRODUCTION
The City of Brookings Parks, Recreation & Forestry Department (“Department”) is committed to provide high quality parks and
recreation facilities and recreation programs that serve the Brookings community. To build on this legacy, the City desired a Parks
and Recreation Master Plan (“Master Plan”) to establish a long-term plan focusing on sustainability and maximizing resources while
providing an appropriate level/balance of facilities and amenities throughout the community. The Master Plan builds off the adopted
2010 Master Plan and creates a new “road map” for the Department to follow for the next ten years.
The Department builds and maintains the parks in the Brookings Park system, which is comprised of approximately 697-acres. The
Department also cooperates closely with the Brookings School District in building and maintaining joint school / park facilities, as
well as other City properties. The Department maintains a fully equipped maintenance fleet of vehicles, mowers, and specialty
equipment. Full-time staff assisted by seasonal employees, provides all maintenance, and plays a significant role in developing and
constructing new parks. Also, the Department provides many programming opportunities to the community that are held at the
numerous special-use facilities that include among others the Larson Ice Center, Fishback Soccer Complex, Bob Shelden Field,
Hillcrest Park, Pioneer Park, Dakota Nature Park, and Edgebrook Golf Course.
The Master Plan sought community input to identify and confirm the Department’s vision and expectations for the future of the park
and recreation system. Community input was received via virtual focus groups, key stakeholder interviews, a statistically-valid
needs analysis survey, and a community online open survey, as well as feedback from the community during open City Council and
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board meetings. The information gathered from the community engagement process was combined
with technical research to produce the final Master Plan.
2
1.2 MASTER PLAN GOALS
The Master Plan includes a system-wide assessment and evaluation of existing parks and recreational facilities in conjunction with
the development of a comprehensive plan that identifies current and future needs as related to parks and recreation facilities. The
Master Plan will establish a prioritized framework for future development or redevelopment of
the City’s parks and recreation system over the next ten years. The Master Plan is a resource to develop policies and guidelines
related to location, use, resource allocation, and level of service that will provide direction to City staff, Parks and Recreation Board,
and the City Council.
The goals of the Master Plan include:
• Engage the Brookings community, leadership and stakeholders through innovative public input means to build a shared
vision for parks, recreation, facilities, and greenways for the next ten years.
• Utilize a wide variety of data sources and best practices, including a statistically-valid survey to predict trends and
patterns of use and how to address unmet needs in the City.
• Determine unique Level of Service Standards to develop appropriate actions regarding parks, recreation, facilities,
and greenways that reflects the City’s strong commitment in providing high quality recreational activities for the community.
• Shape financial and operational preparedness through innovative and “next” practices to achieve the strategic
objectives and recommended actions.
• Develop a dynamic and realistic strategic action plan that creates a road map to ensure long-term success and
financial sustainability for the City’s parks, recreation facilities, programs, and greenways, as well as action steps to support
the family-oriented community and businesses that call Brookings’s home.
1.3 P ROJECT P ROCESS
The Master Plan followed a process of data collection, public input, on-the-ground study, assessment of existing conditions, market
research, and open dialogue with local leadership and key stakeholders. The project process followed a planning path, as illustrated
below:
Where Are We Today?
Site & facility assessments
Park classification and level of
service standards
Program assessment
Related plans review (e.g.,
Bicycle Master Plan)
Where Are We Going Tomorrow?
Statistically-valid survey
Online survey
Demographics and trends
analysis
Benchmark analysis
Stakeholder interviews and
focus groups
How Do We Get There?
Needs prioritization
Operational review
Capital improvement planning
Funding and revenue planning
Strategic action plan
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
3
1.4 CURRENT PARKS MAP & DEFINITION OF PLANNING AREA
The planning area for this Master Plan includes all areas within the boundaries of the City of Brookings. While this plan recognizes
that the actual service areas of some Brookings parks, facilities, and programs may extend beyond the defined boundaries of the
planning area as Brookings serves as a regional-hub, the primary purpose of this plan is to first and foremost identify and address
the park and recreation needs of Brookings residents. The following map depicts the planning area and location of parks and
greenways.
4
1.4.1 BROOKINGS INVENTORY
Current Brookings inventory by park name, address, park classification and size are detailed below:
Name Address Classification Acres
Indian Hills Park Half Moon Road & Santee Trail Mini Park 3.9
Lions Park Medary Avenue & RR Tracks Mini Park 2.3
Sarah Renee Park Western Avenue & Regency Court Mini Park 2.7
Southside Park Main Avenue & 2nd Street Mini Park 3.5
Valley View Park Rapid Valley Street Mini Park 2.7
Arrowhead Park 1115 Indian Hills Road Neighborhood 11.6
Camelot Park Christine Avenue & Yorktown Drive Neighborhood 7.3
McClemans Park 15th Street & 7th Avenue Neighborhood 3.4
Moriarty Park 17th Avenue & Pebble Beach Drive Neighborhood 10.6
Dwiggins-Medary Park 621 Medary Avenue South Community 22.5
Hillcrest Park 1520 6th Street and 17th Avenue Community 19.2
Larson Park 22nd Avenue South & Eastbrook Drive Community 18.7
Pioneer Park 6th Street & First Avenue Community 17
Sexauer Park & Campground 121 West 10th Street Community 19.5
Bark Park 12th Street South & 7th Avenue South Special Use 0.25
Northbrook Park Community
Garden
US Highway 14 Bypass & Medary
Avenue
Special Use 60
Dakota Nature Park 22nd Avenue South and 32nd Street Special Use 135
Fishback Soccer Complex 1100 20th Street South Special Use 91
Southbrook Softball Complex 22nd Avenue South Special Use 25
Edgebrook Golf Course 1415 22nd Ave South Special Use 150
Larson Ice Center 924 32nd Avenue Special Use 20
Rotary Park 2220 6th St. and 20th Avenue Open Space 8
Pheasant Nest 12th Street South & 7th Avenue South Open Space 11
Brookings Prairie W 44th Street S & 470th Avenue Open Space 40
Gustafson Pond 6th Street West 1/2-mile NW of the
Western Avenue Intersection
Water Space 12.8
Total Park Acres 697.95
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
5
Name Address Classification Acres
Medary Park 718 5th Street South School Park 16.7
Mickelson Park 1801 12th Street South School Park 3
Hillcrest Park 304 15th Avenue School Park 2.3
6th Street Median 65th Street Median Irrigation, Turf, and Trees 13
1.5 VISION, MISSION, AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
The following outlines the foundational framework for the Brookings Parks, Recreation & Forestry Department including vision,
mission, and guiding principles:
Vision
"Brookings is a vibrant and desirable community providing attractive and well-
maintained parks, trails, recreation facilities, programs, and customer service to the
community, while maintaining safe, accessible, and healthy natural park surroundings.”
Mission
“Provide great parks, trails, recreation facilities, and programs that benefit all residents
and visitors through enjoyable experiences that make living in Brookings the
community of choice.”
Organizational
Values and
Principles
•Organizational Effectivness
•Collaboration
•Fiscal Accountability
•Professionalism
•Continuous Improvement
•Responsible
•Resources Conservation
•Respectful
6
1.6 ISSUES AND THEMES
Based on community feedback, stakeholder input, technical analysis, and the priority rankings outlined within this Master Plan, the
following issues and themes were developed to enhance the park and recreation system and position it to best serve the current
and future needs of the Brookings community:
• Trails, trails, trails … the Brookings community loves its trails and wants more of them, as well as completion of the Bike
Master Plan.
• Community appreciates the variety of park experiences the City provides and contribution to Brookings’ quality-of-life.
• Take-care of what we already own.
• Need for additional indoor recreation and aquatics.
• Activate the parks through more programming.
• Year-round indoor programming is desired.
• Need for additional funding for capital replacements.
• Value the many partnerships with South Dakota State University, the School District, and Sports Groups
1.7 KEY RECOMMENDATIONS
The following four initiatives outline the action plan’s key recommendations:
1.7.1 INITIATIVE #1: WELL MAINTAINED AND SAFE PARK LANDS AND TRAILS
Vision: Our vision for park land is to create the correct balance of park space dedicated to neighborhood parks, community parks
and trails across the city to ensure a balance of active parks and natural preserved areas.
Goal: Brookings Parks and Recreation provides responsible stewardship and sustainable land management of its 697.95 acres of
property, open space, trails, and natural resources.
• Opportunities for self-directed recreation are provided through an extensive system of well-maintained parks, trails, bike
paths, natural areas, and accessible open spaces.
• Neighborhood Parks and Community Parks are activated through effective park design and amenities that bring a sense of
place, support community recreation needs and create positive experiences for people of all ages.
• Trails are connected through an easy-to-understand bike pathway system of trails and on street sidewalks that allow any
user to walk, run or bike in a safe environment.
• Brookings Parks and Recreation maintains and operates a wide variety of amenities in parks both year-round and seasonally
to serve residents and visitors of all age groups in a positive and safe environment.
• Park assets are maintained in a proper lifecycle manner to encourage positive use and year-round use through appropriate
maintenance and replacement schedules as needed.
• Consistent signage to educate users about parks, wayfinding, safety, and trails are provided.
• Establish a standard for land in the system that is left in a natural state.
1.7.2 INITIATIVE #2: HIGH PERFORMING PARK AND FACILITY MANAGEMENT
Vision: Brookings Park and Recreation staff achieves high levels of community support and satisfaction and is governed and
managed in an efficient and cost-effective manner that provides great value from taxes and user fees.
Goal: Adhere to good governance and management principles and practices
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
7
• Park and Recreation Board Polices and By-laws are updated to follow responsible management of the park and recreation
system.
• The Park and Recreation Department maintains effective interagency relationships with the Public Works Department and the
City Manager’s Office.
• Updated pricing policies and partnership polices are established to create equity between partners and user groups.
• Key performance indicators will be established for all operational divisions within the park and recreation system to
demonstrate efficiency and effectiveness.
• Use technology to enhance effectiveness and efficiency of the Department will be instituted at a higher level of impact to
support the user experience with the Departments services and amenities.
• Create a volunteer program to assist with park maintenance.
• Ensure staffing of park maintenance is aligned with community expectations.
1.7.3 INITIATIVE 3#: ENHANCE PROGRAMS, SERVICES AND EXPERIENCES
Vision: Brookings Park and Recreation vision for programs and services is to activate more park and recreation facilities that serve
a wider audience and provide residents the ability to connect to the system.
Goal: High quality recreation programs and amenities are well developed, maintained, operated, and utilized.
• Consider adding a total of two (2) to four (4) additional core programs into the system that could include: summer camps,
special events, adult fitness and wellness, environmental education, adventure programs, people with disabilities, life-long
learning, STEM, and programs for active adults.
• Develop a feasibility study for an indoor aquatic and community center facility that serves a multitude of core programs that
can support the core programs outlined in the most cost-effective manner.
• Park amenity utilization, cost recovery and user satisfaction of amenities and facilities are optimized through scheduling,
staffing and amenity access and through effective fee polices.
• A cost-of-service study is conducted on any new programs or facilities to determine the cost of operations and cost
effectiveness of each program and amenity operated.
• An effective marketing plan is created to enhance the use of all public mediums to encourage more community awareness,
use, and appreciation for program services.
1.7.4 INITIATIVE #4: ENHANCE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
Vision: Maximize the value of all parks and recreation facilities to achieve the highest value of use and return on investment.
Goal: Complete the development of a long-term capital improvement and replacement plan with funding strategy.
• Develop business plans for all revenue producing facilities within the system to maximize the use, efficiency of programs and
services, staffing and operations to reduce the need for tax support.
• A long-term funding strategy and financial plan for capital investment and reinvestment is developed and implemented.
• Consider a Business Improvement District downtown to assist in the maintenance cost.
• Consider the creation of a Park Foundation to increase capital and operational dollars to support the system as a strategic
partner.
• Evaluate land leases on excess park property for commercial investment to generate revenue to offset existing operational
costs.
8
• Consider a land dedication ordinance on new development to cover capital costs in lieu of park land.
• Consider an impact fee on new development to cover capital costs for future city-wide attractions.
1.8 CONCLUSION
The Brookings, Parks, Recreation and Forestry Department does an excellent job serving the Brookings community as evident by
the feedback received from the community throughout the master plan.
As with any quality comprehensive planning process, the community was involved throughout the development of the Master Plan
through stakeholder and focus group meetings. A total of 997 residents participated in the online and the statistically-valid survey,
as well as over 60 participants in the focus group and key stakeholder interviews. Public forums were held in the City, and a citizen
survey was offered that helped to prioritize and identify the issues that need to be addressed in the Master Plan and to support the
key recommendations that need to be implemented over the next five years.
The Brookings community takes pride in its parks and recreation system, as evident in the table below that is based on the
statistically-valid needs assessment survey results with comparison to national benchmarks.
This Master Plan establishes recommendations for Brookings to achieve the vision the community has for the park and recreation
system as well as to achieve greater financial sustainability without sacrificing the value of the park assets and amenities or
reducing the level of experiences and services available to users. Brookings already oversees an impressive inventory of parkland,
trails, and amenities with a dedicated workforce. The key is to ensure there are properly maintained staffing levels for maintenance
functions as it adds sustainability to the system and is important to bring all existing assets to their full lifecycle.
It is important that the parks and recreation system finds the balance between the existing and abundant outdoor parks and
recreation amenities, while ensuring residents have opportunities for year-round activities and facilities, which may include
additional indoor recreation space. The Master Plan is a living document with many moving components that must be achieved
simultaneously to ensure Brookings builds upon its legacy over the next five to ten years of providing a comprehensive mix of high
quality, programs, facilities, and services that contribute to Brookings high quality of life.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
9
CHAPTER TWO – BROOKINGS PROFILE
2.1 DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
A key component of the Master Plan process is a Demographic
& Recreation Trends Analysis. This analysis will help provide
a thorough understanding of the demographic makeup of
residents within the City, as well as national and local
recreational trends.
The Demographic Analysis describes the population within the City. This assessment is reflective of the City’s total population and
its key characteristics such as age segments, race, ethnicity, and income levels. It is important to note that future projections are
based on historical patterns and unforeseen circumstances during or after the time of the analysis could have a significant bearing
on the validity of the projected figures.
2.1.1 DEMOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW (2020-2035)
Population:
•24,337 people live in Brookings
•The City is expected to grow to an estimated 27,952
residents by 2035
Race & Ethnicity:
•88% of the population is White Alone
•5% of the population is Asian
•3% of the population is of Hispanic/Latino origin
Age:
•Median age: 25.4 years old
•By 2035, the 55+ age segment will encompass 20% of
the population
Income:
•Median household income: $50,867
•Median household income is below state and
national averages
10
2.1.2 METHODOLOGY
Demographic data used for the analysis was obtained from U.S. Census Bureau and from Environmental Systems Research Institute,
Inc. (ESRI), the largest research and development organization dedicated to Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and specializing
in population projections and market trends. All data was acquired in November 2020 and reflects actual numbers as reported in
the 2010 Census.
ESRI then estimates the current population (2020) as well as a 5-year projection (2025). PROS utilized straight line linear regression
to forecast demographic characteristics for 2030 and 2035. The City boundaries shown below were utilized for the demographic
analysis (Figure 1).
Figure 1: City Boundaries
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
11
POPULATION
The City’s population has experienced a notable growing trend in recent years, increasing 11.23% from 2010 to 2020 (1.12% per
year). This is notably higher than the national annual growth rate of 0.81% (from 2010-2020). Similar to the population, the total
number of households also experienced an increase in the past decade (13.56% since 2010).
Currently, the population is estimated at 24,337 individuals living within 9,210 households. Projecting ahead, the total population
and total number of households are both expected to continue growing at an above average rate over the next 15 years. Based on
2035 predictions, the City’s population is expected to have 27,952 residents living within 10,816 households (Figures 2 & 3).
Figure 2: Total Population Projections
Figure 3: Total Household Projections
21,880
24,337 25,511 26,740 27,952
1.12%
0.96%0.96%0.91%
0.00%
0.50%
1.00%
1.50%
2.00%
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
2010 2020 2025 2030 2035
Total Population / Avg Annual Growth
Brookings Population Average Annual Growth (%)
8,110
9,210 9,726 10,276 10,816
1.36%
1.12%1.13%1.05%
0.00%
0.50%
1.00%
1.50%
2.00%
2.50%
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
2010 2020 2025 2030 2035
Total Households / Avg Annual Growth
Brookings Households Average Annual Growth (%)
12
AGE SEGMENT
Evaluating the City’s total population by age segments, it exhibits an extremely young populace, with approximately 66% of its
residents being under the age of 35-years old. The population has a median age of 25.4 years old which is significantly younger
than the U.S. median age of 38.5 years. This sort of discrepancy in age segment distribution is fairly typical for most university
cities. With Brookings being home to South Dakota State University, it is expected for the 18-24 population to be greatly higher than
the national average.
The overall composition of Brookings’ population is projected remain relatively unchanged over the next 15 years with a minor
aging trend. This is most likely due to the fact that the City has a large student-based population that will always provide a constant
age group (i.e., once students graduate, they tend to move away to begin their careers and are replaced by a new student
population.) However, with the University’s enrollment numbers declining in recent years, the overall population has slowly begun
to age and this trend is expected to continue for the foreseeable future.
Figure 4: Population by Age Segments
16%16%16%16%16%
52%50%47%46%44%
16%16%19%19%19%
11%13%13%14%15%
5%5%5%5%5%
2010 2020 2025 2030 2035
Population by Age Segment
0-17 18-34 35-54 55-74 75+
Brookings
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
13
RACE AND ETHNICITY DEFINI TIONS
The minimum categories for data on race and ethnicity for Federal statistics, program administrative reporting, and civil rights
compliance reporting are defined as below. The Census 2010 data on race are not directly comparable with data from the 2000
Census and earlier censuses; therefore, caution must be used when interpreting changes in the racial composition of the US
population over time. The latest (Census 2010) definitions and nomenclature are used within this analysis.
• American Indian – This includes a person having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America
(including Central America), and who maintains tribal affiliation or community attachment
• Asian – This includes a person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian
subcontinent including, for example, Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine Islands,
Thailand, and Vietnam
• Black – This includes a person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa
• Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander – This includes a person having origins in any of the original peoples of
Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific Islands
• White – This includes a person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa
• Hispanic or Latino – This is an ethnic distinction, a subset of a race as defined by the Federal Government; this includes
a person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, South or Central American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race
Please Note: The Census Bureau defines Race as a person’s self-identification with one or more of the following social groups: White,
Black or African American, Asian, American Indian, and Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander, some other race,
or a combination of these. While Ethnicity is defined as whether a person is of Hispanic / Latino origin or not. For this reason, the
Hispanic / Latino ethnicity is viewed separate from race throughout this demographic analysis.
14
RACE
Analyzing race, the City’s current population is predominantly White Alone. The 2020 estimate shows that 88% of the population
falls into the White Alone category, with Asian (5%) representing the largest minority. The racial diversification of the City is notably
less diverse than the national population, which is approximately 70% White Alone, 13% Black Alone, and 7% Some Other Race.
The predictions for 2035 expect the population to continue diversifying with a slight decrease in the White Alone population,
accompanied by minor increases to all other race categories (Figure 5).
ETHNICITY
The City’s population was also assessed based on
Hispanic/Latino ethnicity, which by the Census Bureau definition
is viewed independently from race. It is important to note that
individuals who are Hispanic/Latino in ethnicity can also identify
with any of the racial categories from Figure 5.
Based on the 2010 Census, those of Hispanic/ Latino origin
represent approximately 3% of the City’s current population,
which is significantly less than the national average (19%
Hispanic/Latino). The Hispanic/ Latino population is expected to
grow minimally, increasing to 5% of the City’s total population
by 2035 (Figure 6).
Figure 5: Population by Race
Figure 6: Population by Ethnicity
92%88%87%85%84%
3%3%4%4%
4%5%6%6%7%
2010 2020 2025 2030 2035
Population by Race
White Alone Black Alone American Indian Asian
Pacific Islander Some Other Race Two or More Races
Brookings
2%3%5%
98%97%95%
2010 2020 2035
Hispanic / Latino Population
All Others Hispanic / Latino Origin (any race)
Brookings
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
15
HOUSEHOLD INCOME
As seen in Figure 7, the City’s per capita income ($26,122) and median household income ($50,867) are both lower than state ($29,872
&$56,185) and national ($34,136 & $62,203) averages. Although income characteristics for the City are much lower than state and
national averages, this discrepancy is typical in cities where a large percentage of the population are college students with limited
earning capabilities.
Figure 7: Income Characteristics $26,122 $29,872 $34,136 $50,867 $56,185 $62,203 BROOKINGS SOUTH DAKOTA U.S.A.
Income Characteristics
Per Capita Income Median Household Income
2020
16
DEMOGRAPHIC COMPARATIVE SUMMARY
The table below is a summary of the City’s demographic figures. These figures are then compared to the state and U.S. populations.
This type of analysis allows the City to see how their population compares on a local and national scale. The highlighted cells
represent key takeaways from the comparison between the City and the national population.
= Significantly higher than the National Average
= Significantly lower than the National Average
Figure 8: Demographic Comparative Summary Table
Brookings South
Dakota U.S.A.
Annual Growth Rate
(2010-2020)1.12% 1.13% 0.81%
Projected Annual
Growth Rate
(2020-2035)
0.99% 1.00% 0.74%
Annual Growth Rate
(2010-2020)1.36% 1.25% 0.80%
Average Household
Size 2.28 2.41 2.58
Ages 0-17 16% 24% 22%
Ages 18-34 50% 22% 23%
Ages 35-54 16% 23% 25%
A ges 55-74 13% 23% 23%
Ages 75+5%8%7%
White Alone 87.8% 82.4% 69.4%
Black Alone 2.7% 2.6% 13.0%
American Indian 1.2% 8.7% 1.0%
Asian 5.0% 1.9% 5.9%
Pacific Islander 0.0% 0.1% 0.2%
Some other Race 1.4% 1.5% 7.1%
Two or More Races 1.8% 2.8% 3.6%
Hispanic / Latino
Origin (any race)3.3% 4.5% 18.8%
All Others 96.7% 95.5% 81.2%
Per Capita
Income $26,122 $29,872 $34,136
Median Household
Income $50,867 $56,185 $62,203Income Characteristics2020 Demographic
Comparison
PopulationHouseholdsAge Segment DistributionRace DistributionHispanic/Latino Population
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
17
DEMOGRAPHIC SUMMARY
• The City’s recent population annual growth rate (1.12%) is significantly higher than the U.S.’s (0.81%) growth rate.
• The City’s household annual growth rate (1.36%) is more than 1 ½ times higher than the national average (0.80%).
• When assessing age segments, the City exhibits a much younger population than the national age segment distribution.
(Note: this is primarily due to the high college student population)
• The City’s racial distribution is notably less diverse than the national population distribution, with a much greater
White Alone population percentage.
• Brookings’ percentage of Hispanic/Latino population (3.3%) is roughly 1/6 of the national average (18.8%).
• The City’s per capita income ($26,122) and median house income ($50,867) are both significantly lower than state
($29,872 & $56,185) and national ($34,136 & $62,203) averages. (Note: this is also primarily due to the high college
student population)
2.1.3 DEMOGRAPHIC IMPLICATIONS
While it is important not to generalize recreation needs and priorities based solely on demographics, the analysis suggests some
potential implications for the City.
First, with the population expecting above average growth for the foreseeable future, its suggested that the City should continue
the upkeep of existing facilities in addition to planning to expand facility space and program offerings in order to accommodate the
growing population.
Second, the City’s overall young population may indicate the need to provide more programs and services for the 18-34-year-old
segment. Such a focus could also potentially attract college students and young professional to stay in Brookings after graduating.
However, it will also be important to continue providing services for the growing senior population.
Third, the City’s below average income characteristics suggest limited disposable income. The Parks, Recreation & Forestry
Department should be mindful of this when pricing out programs and events.
Finally, the City should ensure its growing and diversifying population is included in its offerings, marketing and communications
and public outreach.
18
2.2 RECREATIONAL TRENDS ANALYSIS
The Trends Analysis provides an understanding of national, and local recreational trends. Trends data used for this analysis was
obtained from Sports & Fitness Industry Association’s (“SFIA”), National Recreation and Park Association (“NRPA”), and ESRI. All
trends data is based on current and/or historical participation rates or statistically-valid survey results.
2.2.1 NATIONAL TRENDS IN RECREATION
METHODOLOGY
The SFIA’s Sports, Fitness & Recreational Activities Topline Participation Report 2020 was utilized in evaluating the following trends:
• National Recreation Participatory Trends
• Core vs. Casual Participation Trends
The study is based on findings from surveys carried out in 2019 by the Physical Activity Council
(“PAC”), resulting in a total of 18,000 online interviews. Surveys were administered to all
genders, ages, income levels, regions, and ethnicities to allow for statistical accuracy of the national population. A sample size of
18,000 completed interviews is considered by SFIA to result in a high degree of statistical accuracy. A sport with a participation rate
of five percent has a confidence interval of plus or minus 0.32 percentage points at a 95 percent confidence level. Using a weighting
technique, survey results are applied to the total U.S. population figure of 302,756,603 people (ages six and older).
The purpose of the report is to establish levels of activity and identify key participatory trends in recreation across the U.S. This
study looked at 122 different sports/activities and subdivided them into various categories including: sports, fitness, outdoor
activities, aquatics, etc.
Core vs. Casual Participation
In addition to overall participation rates, SFIA further categorizes active participants as either core or casual participants based on
frequency of participation. Core participants have higher participatory frequency than casual participants. The thresholds that define
casual versus core participation may vary based on the nature of each individual activity. For instance, core participants engage in
most fitness activities more than 50-times per year, while for sports, the threshold for core participation is typically 13-times per
year.
In a given activity, core participants are more committed and tend to be less likely to switch to other activities or become inactive
(engage in no physical activity) than causal participants. This may also explain why activities with more core participants tend to
experience less pattern shifts in participation rates than those with larger groups of casual participants.
2.2.2 NATIONAL SPORT AND FITNESS PARTICIPATORY TRENDS
NATIONAL TRENDS IN GENERAL SPORTS
Participation Levels
The sport’s most heavily participated in the United States were Basketball (24.9 million) and Golf (24.3 million), which have
participation figures well in excess of the other activities within the general sports category. Followed by Tennis (17.7 million),
Baseball (15.8 million), and Outdoor Soccer (11.9 million).
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
19
The popularity of Basketball, Golf, and Tennis can be attributed to the ability to compete with relatively small number of participants.
Basketball’s success can also be attributed to the limited amount of equipment needed to participate and the limited space
requirements necessary, which make basketball the only traditional sport that can be played at the majority of American dwellings
as a drive-way pickup game. Even though Golf has experienced a recent decrease in participation in the last 5-years, it still continues
to benefit from its wide age segment appeal and is considered a life-long sport. In Addition, target type game venues or Golf
Entertainment Venues (e.g., Top Golf) have increased drastically (84.7%) as a 5-year trend. The emergence of Golf Entertainment,
such as Top Golf, has helped increase participation for golf as an activity outside of traditional golf course environments.
Five-Year Trend
Since 2014, Golf Entertainment Venues (84.7%), Pickleball (40.5%), and Flag Football (23.1%) have emerged as the overall fastest
growing sports. During the last five-years. Similarly, Baseball (20.2%) and Indoor Soccer (17.8%) have also experienced significant
growth. Based on the trend from 2014-2019, the sports that are most rapidly declining include Ultimate Frisbee (-49.4%), Squash (-
23.4%), Touch Football (-21.5%), Badminton (-15.1%), and Tackle Football (-14.6%).
One-Year Trend
In general, the most recent year shares a similar pattern with the five-year trends; with Boxing for Competition (8.2%), Golf-
Entertainment Venues (6.7%), and Pickleball (4.8%) experiencing the greatest increases in participation this past year. However,
some sports that increased rapidly over the past five years have experienced recent decreases in participation, such as Rugby (-
10.8%) and Gymnastics (-1.5%). Other sports including Ultimate Frisbee (-15.5%), Sand Volleyball (-7.8%), Roller Hockey (-6.8%),
and Touch Football (-6.3) have also seen a significant decrease in participate over the last year.
Core vs. Casual Trends in General Sports
Highly participated in sports, such as Basketball, Baseball, and Slow Pitch Softball, have a larger core participant base (participate
13+ times per year) than casual participant base (participate 1-12 times per year). In the past year, Ice Hockey and Softball -Fast
Pitch have increased core participation. While less mainstream sports, such as Boxing for Competition, Roller Hockey, Badminton,
and Racquetball have larger casual participation base. These participants may be more inclined to switch to other sports or fitness
activities.
Basketball
24.9 Million
Golf
24.3 Million
Tennis
17.7 Million
Baseball
15.8 Million
Soccer
11.9 Million
20
Figure 9: General Sports Participatory Trends
2014 2018 2019 5-Year Trend 1-Year Trend
Basketball 23,067 24,225 24,917 8.0% 2.9%
Golf (9 or 18-Hole Course)24,700 24,240 24,271 -1.7% 0.1%
Tennis 17,904 17,841 17,684 -1.2% -0.9%
Baseball 13,152 15,877 15,804 20.2% -0.5%
Soccer (Outdoor)12,592 11,405 11,913 -5.4% 4.5%
Golf (Entertainment Venue)5,362 9,279 9,905 84.7% 6.7%
Softball (Slow Pitch)7,077 7,386 7,071 -0.1% -4.3%
Football, (Flag)5,508 6,572 6,783 23.1% 3.2%
Volleyball (Court)6,304 6,317 6,487 2.9% 2.7%
Badminton 7,176 6,337 6,095 -15.1% -3.8%
Soccer (Indoor)4,530 5,233 5,336 17.8% 2.0%
Football, (Touch)6,586 5,517 5,171 -21.5% -6.3%
Football, (Tackle)5,978 5,157 5,107 -14.6% -1.0%
Gymnastics 4,621 4,770 4,699 1.7% -1.5%
Volleyball (Sand/Beach)4,651 4,770 4,400 -5.4% -7.8%
Track and Field 4,105 4,143 4,139 0.8% -0.1%
Cheerleading 3,456 3,841 3,752 8.6% -2.3%
Pickleball 2,462 3,301 3,460 40.5% 4.8%
Racquetball 3,594 3,480 3,453 -3.9% -0.8%
Ice Hockey 2,421 2,447 2,357 -2.6% -3.7%
Ultimate Frisbee 4,530 2,710 2,290 -49.4% -15.5%
Softball (Fast Pitch)2,424 2,303 2,242 -7.5% -2.6%
Lacrosse 2,011 2,098 2,115 5.2% 0.8%
Wrestling 1,891 1,908 1,944 2.8% 1.9%
Roller Hockey 1,736 1,734 1,616 -6.9% -6.8%
Boxing for Competition 1,278 1,310 1,417 10.9% 8.2%
Rugby 1,276 1,560 1,392 9.1% -10.8%
Squash 1,596 1,285 1,222 -23.4% -4.9%
National Participatory Trends - General Sports
Activity Participation Levels % Change
Legend:Large Increase
(greater than 25%)
Moderate
Increase
(0% to 25%)
Moderate
Decrease
(0% to -25%)
Large Decrease
(less than -25%)
NOTE: Participation figures are in 000's for the US population ages 6 and over
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
21
NATIONAL TRENDS IN GENERAL FITNESS
Participation Levels
Overall, national participatory trends in fitness have experienced strong growth in recent years. Many of these activities have
become popular due to an increased interest among Americans to improve their health and enhance quality of life by engaging in
an active lifestyle. These activities also have very few barriers to entry, which provides a variety of options that are relatively
inexpensive to participate in and can be performed by most individuals. The most popular general fitness activities amongst the
U.S. population include: Fitness Walking (111.4 million), Treadmill (56.8 million), Free Weights (51.4 million), Running/Jogging (49.5
million), and Stationary Cycling (37.1 million).
Five-Year Trend
Over the last five years (2014-2019), the activities growing most rapidly are Trail Running (46.0%), Yoga (20.6%), Cross Training
Style Workout (20.2%), and Stationary Group Cycling (17.5%). Over the same time frame, the activities that have undergone the
biggest decline include: Traditional Triathlon (-9.2%), Running/Jogging (-8.7%), Free Weights (-8.3%), and Fitness Walking (-1.0%)
One-Year Trend
In the last year, activities with the largest gains in participation were Trail Running (9.9%), Dance, Step, & Choreographed Exercise
(7.0%), and Yoga (6.0%). From 2018-2019, the activities that had the largest decline in participation were Traditional Triathlons (-
7.7%), Non-Traditional Triathlon (-7.4%), Bodyweight Exercise (-2.8%), and Running/Jogging (-2.6%).
Core vs. Casual trends in General Fitness
The most participated in fitness activities all have a strong core users base (participating 50+ times per year). These fitness
activities include: Fitness Walking, Treadmill, Free Weights, Running/Jogging, Stationary Cycling, Weight/Resistant Machines, and
Elliptical Motion/Cross Training, all having 48% or greater core users.
Fitness Walking
111.4 Million Treadmill
56.8 Million
Dumbbell
Free Weights
51.4 Million
Running/
Jogging
49.5 Million
Stationary
Cycling
37.1 Million
22
Figure 10: General Fitness National Participatory Trends
2014 2018 2019 5-Year Trend 1-Year Trend
Fitness Walking 112,583 111,001 111,439 -1.0% 0.4%
Treadmill 50,241 53,737 56,823 13.1% 5.7%
Free Weights (Dumbbells/Hand Weights)56,124 51,291 51,450 -8.3% 0.3%
Running/Jogging 54,188 50,770 49,459 -8.7% -2.6%
Stationary Cycling (Recumbent/Upright)35,693 36,668 37,085 3.9% 1.1%
Weight/Resistant Machines 35,841 36,372 36,181 0.9% -0.5%
Elliptical Motion Trainer 31,826 33,238 33,056 3.9% -0.5%
Yoga 25,262 28,745 30,456 20.6% 6.0%
Free Weights (Barbells) 25,623 27,834 28,379 10.8% 2.0%
Dance, Step, & Choreographed Exercise 21,455 22,391 23,957 11.7% 7.0%
Bodyweight Exercise 22,390 24,183 23,504 5.0% -2.8%
Aerobics (High Impact/Intensity Training HIIT) 19,746 21,611 22,044 11.6% 2.0%
Stair Climbing Machine 13,216 15,025 15,359 16.2% 2.2%
Cross-Training Style Workout 11,265 13,338 13,542 20.2% 1.5%
Trail Running 7,531 10,010 10,997 46.0% 9.9%
Stationary Cycling (Group)8,449 9,434 9,930 17.5% 5.3%
Pilates Training 8,504 9,084 9,243 8.7% 1.8%
Cardio Kickboxing 6,747 6,838 7,026 4.1% 2.7%
Boot Camp Style Cross-Training 6,774 6,695 6,830 0.8% 2.0%
Martial Arts 5,364 5,821 6,068 13.1% 4.2%
Boxing for Fitness 5,113 5,166 5,198 1.7% 0.6%
Tai Chi 3,446 3,761 3,793 10.1% 0.9%
Barre 3,200 3,532 3,665 14.5% 3.8%
Triathlon (Traditional/Road)2,203 2,168 2,001 -9.2% -7.7%
Triathlon (Non-Traditional/Off Road)1,411 1,589 1,472 4.3% -7.4%
National Participatory Trends - General Fitness
Activity Participation Levels % Change
NOTE: Participation figures are in 000's for the US population ages 6 and over
Large Increase
(greater than 25%)
Moderate
Increase
(0% to 25%)
Moderate
Decrease
(0% to -25%)
Large Decrease
(less than -25%)Legend:
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
23
NATIONAL TRENDS IN OUTDOOR RECREATION
Participation Levels
Results from the SFIA report demonstrate a contrast of growth and decline in participation regarding outdoor/adventure recreation
activities. Much like the general fitness activities, these activities encourage an active lifestyle, can be performed individually or
within a group, and are not as limited by time constraints. In 2019, the most popular activities, in terms of total participants, from
the outdoor/adventure recreation category include: Day Hiking (49.7 million), Road Bicycling (39.4 million), Freshwater Fishing (39.2
million), and Camping within ¼ mile of Vehicle/Home (28.2 million), and Recreational Vehicle Camping (15.4 million).
Five-Year Trend
From 2014-2019, BMX Bicycling (55.2%), Day Hiking (37.2%), Fly Fishing (20.1%), Saltwater Fishing (11.6%), and Mountain Bicycling
(7.2%) have undergone the largest increases in participation. The five-year trend also shows activities such as In-Line Roller Skating
(-20.5%), Archery (-11.7%), and Adventure Racing (-9.5%) experiencing the largest decreases in participation.
One-Year Trend
The one-year trend shows activities growing most rapidly being BMX Bicycling (6.1%), Day Hiking (3.8%), and Birdwatching (3.8%).
Over the last year, activities that underwent the largest decreases in participation include: Climbing (-5.5%), In-Line Roller Skating
(-4.4%), and Camping with a Recreation Vehicle (-3.5%).
Core vs. Casual trends in Outdoor Recreation
A majority of outdoor activities have experienced participation growth in the last five- years. Although this a positive trend, it
should be noted that all outdoor activities participation, besides adventure racing, consist primarily of casual users. This is likely
why we see a lot of fluctuation in participation numbers, as the casual users likely found alternative activities to participate in.
Hiking
(Day)
49.7 Million
Bicycling
(Road)
39.4 Million
Fishing
(Freshwater)
39.2 Million
Camping
(<¼mi. of Car/Home)
28.2 Million
Camping
(Recreational Vehicle)
15.4 Million
24
Figure 11: Outdoor / Adventure Recreation Participatory Trends
2014 2018 2019 5-Year Trend 1-Year Trend
Hiking (Day) 36,222 47,860 49,697 37.2% 3.8%
Bicycling (Road)39,725 39,041 39,388 -0.8% 0.9%
Fishing (Freshwater)37,821 38,998 39,185 3.6% 0.5%
Camping (< 1/4 Mile of Vehicle/Home)28,660 27,416 28,183 -1.7% 2.8%
Camping (Recreational Vehicle)14,633 15,980 15,426 5.4% -3.5%
Fishing (Saltwater)11,817 12,830 13,193 11.6% 2.8%
Birdwatching (>1/4 mile of Vehicle/Home)13,179 12,344 12,817 -2.7% 3.8%
Backpacking Overnight 10,101 10,540 10,660 5.5% 1.1%
Bicycling (Mountain)8,044 8,690 8,622 7.2% -0.8%
Archery 8,435 7,654 7,449 -11.7% -2.7%
Fishing (Fly)5,842 6,939 7,014 20.1% 1.1%
Skateboarding 6,582 6,500 6,610 0.4% 1.7%
Roller Skating, In-Line 6,061 5,040 4,816 -20.5% -4.4%
Bicycling (BMX) 2,350 3,439 3,648 55.2% 6.1%
Climbing (Traditional/Ice/Mountaineering)2,457 2,541 2,400 -2.3% -5.5%
Adventure Racing 2,368 2,215 2,143 -9.5% -3.3%
National Participatory Trends - Outdoor / Adventure Recreation
Activity Participation Levels % Change
NOTE: Participation figures are in 000's for the US population ages 6 and over
Legend:Large Increase
(greater than 25%)
Moderate
Increase
(0% to 25%)
Moderate
Decrease
(0% to -25%)
Large Decrease
(less than -25%)
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
25
NATIONAL TRENDS IN AQUATICS
Participation Levels
Swimming is deemed as a lifetime activity, which is most likely why it continues to have such strong participation. In 2019, Fitness
Swimming was the absolute leader in overall participation (28.2 million) amongst aquatic activities, largely due to its broad,
multigenerational appeal.
Five-Year Trend
Assessing the five-year trend, all aquatic activities have experienced growth. Aquatic Exercise stands out having increased (22.7%)
from 2014-2019, most likely due to the ongoing research that demonstrates the activity’s great therapeutic benefit, followed by
Fitness Swimming (11.5%) and Competition Swimming (4.1%).
One-Year Trend
From 2018-2019, Competitive Swimming (-7.3%) was the only aquatic activity that declined in participation. While both Aquatic
Exercise (6.4%) and Fitness swimming (2.3%) experienced increases when assessing their one-year trend.
Core vs. Casual Trends in Aquatics
All aquatic activities have undergone increases in participation over the last five years, primarily due to large increases in casual
participation (1-49 times per year). From 2014 to 2019, casual participants for Aquatic Exercise (35.7%), Competition Swimming
(22.7%), and Fitness Swimming (18.4%) have all grown significantly. However, all core participation (50+ times per year) for
aquatic activities have decreased over the last five-years.
Swimming
(Fitness)
28.2 Million
Aquatic Exercise
11.2 Million
Swimming
(Competition)
2.8 Million
Figure 12: Aquatic Participatory Trends
2014 2018 2019 5-Year Trend 1-Year Trend
Swimming (Fitness)25,304 27,575 28,219 11.5% 2.3%
Aquatic Exercise 9,122 10,518 11,189 22.7% 6.4%
Swimming (Competition)2,710 3,045 2,822 4.1% -7.3%
National Participatory Trends - Aquatics
Activity Participation Levels % Change
NOTE: Participation figures are in 000's for the US population ages 6 and over
Legend:Large Increase
(greater than 25%)
Moderate
Increase
(0% to 25%)
Moderate
Decrease
(0% to -25%)
Large Decrease
(less than -25%)
26
NATIONAL TRENDS IN WATER SPORTS / ACTIVITIES
Participation Levels
The most popular water sports / activities based on total participants in 2019 were Recreational Kayaking (11.4 million), Canoeing
(8.9 million), and Snorkeling (7.7 million). It should be noted that water activity participation tends to vary based on regional,
seasonal, and environmental factors. A region with more water access and a warmer climate is more likely to have a higher
participation rate in water activities than a region that has a long winter season or limited water access. Therefore, when assessing
trends in water sports and activities, it is important to understand that fluctuations may be the result of environmental barriers
which can greatly influence water activity participation.
Five-Year Trend
Over the last five years, Stand-Up Paddling (29.5%) and Recreational Kayaking (28.5%) were the fastest growing water activity,
followed by White Water Kayaking (9.9%) and Surfing (8.9%). From 2014-2019, activities declining in participation most rapidly
were Water Skiing (-20.1%), Jet Skiing (-19.6%), Scuba Diving (-13.7%), Wakeboarding (-12.7%), and Snorkeling (-12.5%).
One-Year Trend
Similarly, to the five-year trend, Recreational Kayaking (3.3%) and Stand-Up Paddling (3.2%) also had the greatest one-year growth
in participation, from 2018-2019. Activities which experienced the largest decreases in participation in the most recent year include:
Boardsailing/Windsurfing (-9.7%), Sea Kayaking (-5.5), and Water Skiing (-4.8%)
Core VS. Casual Trends in Water Sports/Activities
As mentioned previously, regional, seasonal, and environmental limiting factors may influence the participation rate of water sport
and activities. These factors may also explain why all water-based activities have drastically more casual participants than core
participants, since frequencies of activities may be constrained by uncontrollable factors. These high causal user numbers are likely
why a majority of water sports/activities have experienced decreases in participation in recent years.
Kayaking
11.4 Million
Canoeing
9.0 Million
Snorkeling
7.7 Million
Jet Skiing
5.1 Million
Sailing
3.6 Million
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
27
Figure 13: Water Sports / Activities Participatory Trends
2014 2018 2019 5-Year Trend 1-Year Trend
Kayaking (Recreational)8,855 11,017 11,382 28.5% 3.3%
Canoeing 10,044 9,129 8,995 -10.4% -1.5%
Snorkeling 8,752 7,815 7,659 -12.5% -2.0%
Jet Skiing 6,355 5,324 5,108 -19.6% -4.1%
Sailing 3,924 3,754 3,618 -7.8% -3.6%
Stand-Up Paddling 2,751 3,453 3,562 29.5% 3.2%
Rafting 3,781 3,404 3,438 -9.1% 1.0%
Water Skiing 4,007 3,363 3,203 -20.1% -4.8%
Surfing 2,721 2,874 2,964 8.9%3.1%
Wakeboarding 3,125 2,796 2,729 -12.7% -2.4%
Scuba Diving 3,145 2,849 2,715 -13.7% -4.7%
Kayaking (Sea/Touring)2,912 2,805 2,652 -8.9% -5.5%
Kayaking (White Water)2,351 2,562 2,583 9.9%0.8%
Boardsailing/Windsurfing 1,562 1,556 1,405 -10.1% -9.7%
National Participatory Trends - Water Sports / Activities
Activity Participation Levels % Change
NOTE: Participation figures are in 000's for the US population ages 6 and over
Legend:Large Increase
(greater than 25%)
Moderate
Increase
(0% to 25%)
Moderate
Decrease
(0% to -25%)
Large Decrease
(less than -25%)
28
2.2.3 PROGRAMS OFFERED BY PARK AND RECREATION AGENCIES (MIDWEST REGION)
PROGRAMS OFFERED BY PARK AND RECREATION AGENCIES (MIDWEST REGION)
NRPA’s Agency Performance Review 2020 summarize key
findings from NRPA Park Metrics, which is a benchmark
tool that compares the management and planning of
operating resources and capital facilities of park and
recreation agencies. The report contains data from 1,053
park and recreation agencies across the U.S. as reported
between 2017 and 2019.
Based on this year’s report, the typical agency (i.e., those
at the median values) offers 187 programs annually, with
roughly 64% of those programs being fee-based
activities/events.
According to the information reported to the NRPA, the top five programming activities most frequently offered by park and
recreation agencies, both in the U.S. and regionally, are described in the table below (Figure 14). A complete comparison of
regional and national programs offered by agencies can be found in Figure 15.
When comparing Midwest Region agencies to the U.S. average, team sports, themed special events, social recreation events, and
fitness enhancement classes were identified in top five most commonly provided program areas offered regionally and nationally.
Top 5 Most Offered Core Program Areas
(Offered by Parks and Recreation Agencies)
Midwest (% of agencies offering) U.S. (% of agencies offering)
• Team Sports (96%) • Themed Special Events (88%)
• Aquatics (96%) • Team Sports (87%)
• Themed Special Events (89%) • Social Recreation Events (87%)
• Social Recreation Events (85%) • Fitness Enhancement Classes (82%)
• Fitness Enhancement Classes (83%) • Health & Wellness Education (81%)
Figure 14: Top 5 Core Program Areas
Midwest Region
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
29
Overall, Midwest Region parks and recreation agencies are exceeding the U.S. average regarding program offerings. When utilizing
a discrepancy threshold of +/-5% (or more), Midwest agencies are currently offering Team Sports, Aquatics, Individual Sports,
Racquet Sports, Safety Training and Golf programs at a greater rate than the national average.
Figure 15: Programs Offered by Parks and Recreation Agencies
35%
59%
64%
59%
63%
47%
60%
61%
72%
67%
74%
81%
82%
87%
88%
71%
87%
39%
57%
57%
59%
61%
63%
63%
65%
78%
80%
83%
83%
83%
85%
89%
96%
96%
Running/Cycling Races
Visual Arts
Performing Arts
Natural & Cultural History Activities
Trips & Tours
Golf
Martial Arts
Cultural Crafts
Safety Training
Racquet Sports
Individual Sports
Health & Wellness Education
Fitness Enhancement Classes
Social Recreation Events
Themed Special Events
Aquatics
Team Sports
Core Program Areas Offered by Parks and Recreation Agencies
(Percent of Agencies)
Midwest U.S.
30
TARGETED PROGRAMS FOR CHILDREN, SENIORS, AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
For a better understanding of targeted programs (programs that cater to a specific age segment, demographic, etc.), NRPA also
tracks program offerings that are dedicated specifically to children, seniors, and people with disabilities. This allows for further
analysis of these commonly targeted populations on a national and regional basis.
Based on information reported to the NRPA, the top three targeted programs offered by park and
recreation agencies, nationally and regionally, are described in the table below (Figure 16). A complete
comparison of regional and national targeted program offerings can be found in Figure 17.
Agencies in the Midwest Region tend to offer targeted programs at a lower rate than the national average. Midwest agencies are
currently offering Summer Camps, Teen Programs, and STEM Programs at a significantly lower rate than the national average
(Figure 17).
Top 3 Most Offered Core Program Areas
(Targeting Children, Seniors, and/or People with Disabilities)
Midwest (% of agencies offering) U.S. (% of agencies offering)
• Senior Programs (85%) • Summer Camp (83%)
• Summer Camp (68%) • Senior Programs (78%)
• People with Disabilities (62%) • Teen Programs (65%)
Figure 16: Top 3 Core Target Program Areas
Figure 17: Targeted Programs for Children, Seniors, and People with Disabilities
8%
20%
36%
54%
57%
65%
62%
83%
78%
11%
21%
36%
42%
55%
55%
62%
68%
85%
Full Daycare
Before School Programs
Preschool
STEM Programs
After School Programs
Specific Teen Programs
Programs for People with Disabilities
Summer Camp
Specific Senior Programs
Core Program Areas Targeted for Children, Seniors, and/or People with Disabilities
(Percent of Agencies)
Midwest U.S.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
31
Figure 18: Brookings’ General Sports Participation Trends
2.2.4 LOCAL SPORT AND LEISURE MARKET POTENTIAL
MARKET POTENTIAL INDEX (MPI)
The following charts show sport and leisure market potential data for Brookings, as provided by ESRI. A Market Potential Index
(MPI) measures the probable demand for a product or service within the defined service areas. The MPI shows the likelihood that
an adult resident living within the City will participate in certain activities when compared to the U.S. national average. The national
average is 100 and numbers below 100 would represent lower than average participation rates while and numbers above 100 would
represent higher than average participation rates. The service area is compared to the national average in four (4) categories –
general sports, fitness, outdoor activity, and commercial recreation.
It should be noted that MPI metrics are only one data point used to help determine community trends; thus,
programmatic decisions should not be based solely on MPI metrics.
Overall, when analyzing the City’s MPIs, the data demonstrates well above average market potential index (MPI) numbers. This is
particularly noticeable when analyzing the general sports market potential chart, which show all activities scoring above 100. When
assessing the fitness, outdoor activity, and commercial recreation MPI charts, a majority of these activities also scored well above
the national average (100) including: Went dancing (190 MPI), Pilates (175 MPI), Attended dance performance (170 MPI), Backpacking
(162 MPI), and Spent $1-99 on sports/rec equipment (160 MPI)
These overall above average MPI scores show that the City residents have a rather strong participation presence when it comes to
recreational offerings, especially pertaining to sport activities. This becomes significant when the Parks, Recreation & Forestry
Department considers starting up new programs or building new facilities, giving them a strong tool to estimate resident attendance
and participation.
As seen in the charts below, the following sport and leisure trends are most prevalent for residents within the City. The activities
are listed in descending order, from highest to lowest MPI score. High index numbers (100+) are significant because they
demonstrate that there is a greater potential that residents within the service area will actively participate in offerings provided
by the City’s Parks, Recreation & Forestry Department.
GENERAL SPORTS MARKET POTENTIAL
The general sports MPI chart reveals that overall, the City’s residents are most likely to participate in Tennis (215 MPI), Soccer (205
MPI), and Ice Skating (190 MPI) when compared to the national average.
215 205 190 169 163
135
123 120 103
0
50
100
150
200
250
Tennis Soccer Ice
Skating
Basketball Football Volleyball Baseball Golf SoftballMPI ScoresGeneral Sports MPI
Brookings National Average
32
FITNESS MARKET POTENTIAL
Overall, the fitness MPI chart reflects some of the highest and lowest MPI scores amongst the four assessed categories, with Pilates
(175 MPI) and Jogging/Running (133 MPI) at one end of the spectrum and Yoga (85 MPI) followed by Walking for Exercise (91 MPI) on
the other end.
OUTDOOR ACTIVITY MARKET POTENTIAL
When analyzing Figure 16, Backpacking (162 MPI), Hiking (138 MPI), and Road Bicycling (133 MPI) scored the highest amongst all
outdoor activities. While Horseback Riding (89 MPI) is the least participated in activity, and is slightly below the national average.
Figure 19: Brookings’ Fitness Participation Trends
Figure 20: Brookings’ Outdoor Activity Participation Trends
175
133 128 127
98 95 91 85
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Pilates Jogging/
Running
Weight
Lifting
Swimming Aerobics Zumba Walking
for
Exercise
YogaMPI ScoresFitness MPI
Brookings National Average
162
138 133 129 127 121
89
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Backpacking Hiking Bicycling
(road)
Fishing
(fresh water)
Canoeing/
Kayaking
Bicycling
(mountain)
Horseback
RidingMPI ScoresOutdoor Activity MPI
Brookings National Average
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
33
COMMERCIAL RECREATION MARKET POTENTIAL
The commercial recreation MPI chart shows “Went dancing” (190 MPI), “Attended dance performance” (170 MPI), and “Spent $1-99
on sports/rec equipment” (160 MPI) as the top three activities among City residents when compared to the national average.
Figure 21: Brookings’ Commercial Recreation Participation Trends
94
98
106
107
108
109
111
112
120
122
126
131
134
136
137
153
160
170
190
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Attended classical music/opera performance
Visited an indoor water park in last 12 months
Attended a movie in last 6 months
Visited a zoo in the last 12 months
Spent $250+ on sports/rec equip
Attended sports event
Went to museum
Went to live theater
Played musical instrument
Visited a theme park in last 12 months
Spent $100-249 on sports/rec equip
Did photo album/scrapbooking
Went to art gallery
Went overnight camping in last 12 months
Did painting/drawing
Did photography
Spent $1-99 on sports/rec equip
Attended dance performance
Danced/went dancing
MPI Scores
Commercial Recreation MPI
(Last 12 Months)
Brookings National Average
34
LOCAL RECREATION TRENDS SUMMARY
Overall, the City’s residents demonstrate participation trends that have above average potential index numbers in all four
categories (general sports, fitness, outdoor activity, and commercial recreation). Activities of particular interest include:
• Participation in sports such as tennis, soccer, and ice skating.
• Fitness related classes pertaining to Pilates, cardio, and weight training
• Outdoor programming in areas such as backpacking/hiking, biking, and fishing
• Money spent on going dancing and attending dance performances as well as buying sporting equipment
Moving forward, it will be important for the Department to continue offering its existing program offerings while also considering
some of these new recreational opportunities for its residents and/or partner with other organizations who can ensure resident
needs are being met.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
35
2.3 BENCHMARK ANALYSIS
2.3.1 ME THODOLOGY
With assistance from Department staff operating metrics were identified to benchmark against comparable parks and recreation
agencies. The goal of the analysis is to evaluate how the Department is positioned among peer agencies. The benchmark
assessment is organized into specific categories based on peer agency responses to targeted questions that lend an encompassing
view of each system’s operating metrics as compared to Brookings.
Information used in this analysis was obtained directly from each participating benchmark agency, when available, a 2021 Staffing
Analysis completed by Public Sector Personnel Consultants, and information available through the National Recreation and Park
Association’s (NRPA) Park Metrics Database.
Due to differences in how each system collects, maintains, and reports data, variances may exist. These variations can impact the
per capita and percentage allocations, and the overall comparison must be viewed with this in mind. The benchmark data collection
for all systems was complete as of March 2021, and it is possible that information in this report may have changed since the original
collection date. The information sought was a combination of operating metrics that factor budgets, staffing levels, and inventories.
In some instances, the information was not tracked or not available from the participating agencies. The following agencies were
benchmarked:
• Kearney, NE Parks and Recreation Department
• Laramie, WY Parks and Recreation Department
• Aberdeen, SD Parks, Recreation, and Forestry Department
• Hays, KS Parks Department
The table below lists each benchmark agency in the study, arranged by total population served. Peer agencies represent broad
geographical coverage across the Midwest/Great Plains, and those selected have demographic and organizational characteristics
similar to Brookings. It should also be noted that Brookings is unique, as the City is home to South Dakota State University, and the
Department maintains much more than just parks and is more of a “facility provider” for athletic recreation programming.
For all agencies examined, Brookings represents the benchmark median for population density (1,789 residents per sq. mi.) falling
just below Kearney (2,366 residents per sq. mi.) and Hays (2,011 residents per sq. mi.).
Agency State Jurisdiction
Type Population Jurisdiction Size
(Sq. Mi.)
Population per
Sq. Mi.
NRPA Gold
Medal Winner
CAPRA Accredited
(Year)
Kearney Park and Recreation
Department NE City 34,301 14.50 2,366 No No
Laramie Parks & Recreation
Department WY City 33,295 18.38 1,811 No No
Aberdeen Parks, Recreation &
Forestry Department SD City 28,225 25.00 1,129 No No
Brookings Parks, Recreation &
Forestry Department SD City 24,337 13.60 1,789 No No
Hays Parks Department KS City 20,510 10.20 2,011 No No
36
2.3.2 BENCHMARK COMPARISON
PARK ACRES
The following table provides a general overview of each system’s park acreage. Brookings falls in the middle for number of parks
(21) and for total acres owned/managed with 835 acres. Assessing level of service for park acres, Brookings is the highest in the
study with 34.29 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, which is also well above the NRPA median for similar-sized agencies of 9.6
acres per 1,000 residents. Additionally, Brookings also fairs well when analyzing total developed acres per 1,000 residents, ranking
second amongst benchmark agencies with 25.00 acres
TRAIL MILES
The information below reveals the service levels for dedicated trails within each system. By comparing total trail mileage to the
population of the service area, the level of service provided to the community can be determined, which is expressed as trail miles
for every 1,000 residents. Brookings represents the benchmark’s lowest agency in terms of total trail mileage (18.8 total miles) and
is the second lowest agency for trail mileage per capita (0.77 miles per 1,000) among agencies assessed. However, with 0.77 miles
per 1,000, Brookings is well above the national best practice of 0.25-0.5 of trail miles per 1,000 residents.
Agency Population Total Trail
Miles
Trail Miles per
1,000
Residents
Hays PD 20,510 23.9 1.17
Kearney PRD 34,301 32.0 0.93
Aberdeen PRFD 28,225 25.3 0.89
Brookings PRFD 24,337 18.8 0.77
Laramie PRD 33,295 20.5 0.62
Best Practice = 0.25-0.5 Trail Miles 1,000 Residents
Agency Population Total Number
of Parks
Total
Developed
Acres
Total Developed
Acres per 1,000
Residents
Total Acres
Owned or
Managed
Total Acres per
1,000
Residents
Brookings PRFD 24,337 21 609 25.00 835 34.29
Hays PD 20,510 34 634 30.91 685 33.40
Aberdeen PRFD 28,225 24 612 21.68 857 30.37
Kearney PRD 34,301 18 720 20.99 900 26.24
Laramie PRD 33,295 19 325 9.77 397 11.93
NRPA Median 2020 = 9.6 Acres per 1,000 Residents
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
37
STAFFING/VOLUNTEERS
This section compares staffing levels for each system by comparing full-time equivalents (FTEs) to total population as well as levels
of volunteers. Total FTEs per 10,000 residents is a key performance metric that assesses how well each system is equipped, in terms
of human resources, to serve its jurisdiction. In general, agencies participating in the benchmark study are very well staffed, all
being above the national median of 8.9 FTEs per 10,000 residents. Among peer agencies, Brookings is the median in regards to
staffing relative to the population served with 27.1 FTEs per 10,000 residents. Brookings also ranked the highest total volunteer
hours (650 hours) and third in number of volunteers (80 volunteers) which shows that the system is valued by the community and
its residents.
Utilizing the Staffing Analysis completed by Public Sector Personnel Consultants in 2021, Brookings is higher than the average of 19
Parks/Recreation staff with 22 employees. Regarding, Parks staff only the Department is higher than the average of 9.64 with 11
employees. However, when looking at the Staff per Acre, it is below the average of 0.03 with 0.01. Among peer agencies, the
Department has more parks acreage than average, but lower staff per acre than average.
Agency Population Volunteers
Total
Volunteer
Hours
Av. Hours
per
Volunteer
Total FTEs
FTEs per
10,000
Residents
Kearney PRD 34,301 N/A N/A N/A 112 32.7
Aberdeen PRFD 28,225 85 550 6.5 85 30.1
Brookings PRFD 24,337 80 650 8.1 66 27.1
Laramie PRD 33,295 150 600 4.0 54 16.2
Hays PD 20,510 N/A N/A N/A 27 13.2
NRPA Median 2020 = 8.9 FTEs per 10,000 Residents
38
OPERATING EXPENSE PER CAPITA
Agencies participating in the benchmark study are spending on parks and recreation operations at a substantial rate. Dividing the
annual operational budget by each service area’s population allows for a comparison of how much each agency is spending per
resident. Brookings ranks third among peer agencies for both total operating expense ($3.9M) and expense per resident ($161.93),
but higher than the NRPA median of $95.34 per resident.
This is in part due to the special use facilities (e.g., Larsen Ice Arena) and also because, unlike most agencies, the Department in
Brookings is responsible for maintenance outside of traditional parks amenities (e.g., downtown beautification, medians, etc.) which
contributes to its higher operating budget.
DISTRIBUTION OF EXPENDITURES
The table below compares the distribution of expenditures for each agency across personnel, benefits, operations, capital, and other
expenses. The median distribution for all agencies reporting to the NRPA database who service 20k-50k residents is also provided
for additional perspective. Brookings is spending the third lowest percentage on personnel (58%) and has the second highest
percentage of capital expense not in CIP (10%) when compared to benchmark agencies.
Agency Population
Total
Operating
Expense
Operating
Expense per
Resident
Kearney PRD 34,301 6,521,950$ 190.14$
Aberdeen PRFD 28,225 5,356,550$ 189.78$
Brookings PRFD 24,337 3,941,000$ 161.93$
Hays PD 20,510 2,378,058$ 115.95$
Laramie PRD 33,295 -$ -$
NRPA Median 2020 = $95.34 Operating Expense per Residents
Note: Total Operating Expense was not available for Laramie PRD
Agency Personnel Operations
Capital
Expense not in
CIP
Other
Kearney PRD 70% 30%0%0%
Hays PD 64% 36%0%0%
Brookings PRFD 58% 32% 10%0%
Aberdeen PRFD 55% 29% 11%5%
NRPA Agencies Serving 20k-50k Residents 53% 39%6%2%
Note: The distribution of expenditures were not available for the Laramie PRD
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
39
REVENUE PER CAPITA
By comparing each agency’s annual non-tax revenue to the population, the annual revenue generated on a per resident basis can
be determined. Although Brookings $41.75 of revenue generated per resident represents the benchmark median, this level of
earned income is significantly higher than the national median of $25.34 of revenue per resident.
OPERATIONAL COST RECOVERY
Operational cost recovery is a key performance indicator, arrived at by dividing total non-tax revenue by total operating expense.
This measures how well each agency’s revenue generation covers the total cost of operations. Overall, agencies participating in
the benchmark study have a wide range of cost recovery, with Kearney (58%) achieving above industry best practice levels.
Brookings has the second highest cost recovery rate among peer agencies, its 26% operational cost recovery is right at the NRPA
median (26.6%).
In addition, as mentioned earlier, Brookings is also responsible for maintaining acreage not included as parks (e.g., downtown
beautification, medians, etc.) which add to their operating expenses but are non-revenue generating services.
Agency Population Total Non-Tax
Revenue
Revenue per
Resident
Kearney PRD 34,301 3,778,635$ 110.16$
Brookings PRFD 24,337 1,016,080$ 41.75$
Aberdeen PRFD 28,225 670,000$ 23.74$
Hays PD 20,510 278,415$ 13.57$
NRPA Median 2020 = $25.34 Revenue per Residents
Note: Total Non-Tax Revenue was not available for Laramie PRD
Agency Total Non-Tax
Revenue
Total Operating
Expense
Operational Cost
Recovery
Kearney PRD 3,778,635$ 6,521,950$ 58%
Brookings PRFD 1,016,080$ 3,941,000$ 26%
Aberdeen PRFD 670,000$ 5,356,550$ 13%
Hays PD 278,415$ 2,378,058$ 12%
NRPA Median for Agencies Serving 20k-50k Residents= 26.6% Cost Recovery
Note: Financials was not available for Laramie PRD
40
CIP SUMMARY
Due to the volatility of Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) budgets and availability of funding from year to year, the table below reveals
the last four years of actual investment and the budgeted CIP for 2021. These figures were then utilized to show the average annual
capital investment for each agency. The top performing benchmark agencies are investing significant dollars into CIP efforts each
year, as Kearney and Aberdeen are above the NRPA median for agencies serving 20k-50k residents ($2.9M annual average).
Brookings is currently averaging $1.8M.
CIP USE
The table below describes the designated uses for capital investments for each of the benchmark agencies. Brookings is primarily
focused on renovation (50%) and other/equipment (50%) for capital improvements. The benchmark agencies are spending the
majority of their capital budgets on renovation and development, while acquisitions were mainly relevant for Kearney.
MARKETING
Marketing budgets for parks and recreation agencies are typically much less than the private sector, but the industry is beginning
to realize the value of investing in marketing and the potential return on investment that can be achieved. The table below compares
the most recent marketing expense (2019) and the current marketing budget (2020) for each agency. Then the current budget is
divided by the total population served to arrive at the total marketing spend per resident. Brookings represents the third highest
marketing budget in the study, and reports the third lowest spending per capita ($0.73).
Agency CIP Budget
2017
CIP Budget
2018
CIP Budget
2019
CIP Budget
2020
CIP Budget
2021
Avg. Annual
CIP
Kearney PRD 1,659,094$ 952,542$ 1,381,721$ 7,352,555$ 9,867,864$ 4,242,755$
Brookings PRFD 516,000$ 693,000$ 3,613,000$ 3,291,000$ 923,000$ 1,807,200$
Aberdeen PRFD -$ -$ -$ 4,600,000$ 1,579,000$ 3,089,500$
Hays PD 238,411$ 342,800$ 232,438$ 119,264$ 4,170,920$ 1,020,767$
NRPA Median for Agencies Serving 20k-50k Residents= $2.9M CIP Budget
Note: The CIP budgets were not available for Laramie PRD and only two years were available for Aberdeen PRFD
Agency Renovation Development Acquisition Other
Brookings PRFD 50%0%0%50%
Kearney PRD 40% 30% 30%0%
Hays PD 0% 100% 0%0%
NRPA Agencies Serving 20k-50k Residents 57% 32%6%5%
Note: The Capital Budgets were not available for Laramie PRD or Aberdeen PRFD
Agency Population Total Marketing
Expense (2019)
Total Marketing
Budget (2020)
Marketing $$
Spent per
Resident (2020)
Hays PD 20,510 18,535$ 30,000$ 1.46$
Kearney PRD 34,301 35,110$ 29,702$ 0.87$
Laramie PRD 33,295 11,201$ 26,702$ 0.80$
Brookings PRFD 24,337 18,960$ 17,730$ 0.73$
Aberdeen PRFD 28,225 4,500$ 5,000$ 0.18$
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
41
MARKETING AS PERCENTAGE OF OPERATIONS
The table below describes the marketing expense incurred by each agency and compares it to the Brooking’s actual expenditures
for 2019 to show what percentage of the operating expenses are dedicated to marketing. Compared to its peers, Brookings ranks
second for total marketing expense ($18,960) and third when comparing the percentage of operations spent on marketing (0.47%).
However, all benchmarked agencies fall well below the recommended best practice for total marketing expense as percentage of
the total operating budget (3%-4%).
In the case of Brookings, the City’s Public Information Officer complements the marketing efforts, and the larger special events in
parks conduct their own marketing, while the majority of the marketing is still done by site staff in addition to their day-to-day
responsibilities.
SOCIAL MEDIA
Social media has increasingly become an integral part of marketing for parks and recreation agencies. The table below provides a
snapshot of how many followers / subscribers each agency has across multiple platforms. Brookings has a relatively strong follower
base for the three largest outlets, Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. It should be noted that some Departments utilized their City’s
account followers in instances where they don’t have their own independent social media pages.
Agency Total Marketing
Expense (2019)
Operational
Expense (2019)
Marketing as %
of Operations
Hays PD 18,535$ 2,348,426$ 0.79%
Kearney PRD 35,110$ 6,300,066$ 0.56%
Brookings PRFD 18,960$ 4,036,000$ 0.47%
Aberdeen PRFD 4,500$ 5,225,125$ 0.09%
Note: Operational expenses were not available for Laramie PRD
Best Practice = 3%-4% of Total Operating Budget
Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube
Hays PD 3,339 83 358 5
Laramie PRD 2,490 N/A 993 N/A
Brookings PRFD 4,648 652 217 N/A
Kearney PRD 6,314 383 613 N/A
Note: Social Media statistics were not available for Aberdeen PRFD
Agency Followers/Subscribers by Social Media Platform
42
PROGRAM PARTICIPATION
This portion assesses program participation for each agency by comparing total registered program participations to the population
of each service area to determine the average participation rate per resident. Program activity is measured in participations (versus
participants), which accounts for each time a resident participates in a program and allows for multiple participations per individual.
Brookings represents the second lowest of the benchmark agencies with more than 0.13 participation per resident.
It should be noted that Brookings functions as a facility provider for programming and utilizes independent youth sports leagues to
provide programming.
PROGRAM REVENUES
As an additional indicator of revenue-generating capabilities of benchmark agencies, the program revenue of each department was
compared to total residents within each jurisdiction. Brookings ranks third among benchmark agencies and demonstrates modest
earnings from programming, generating approximately $4.25 in program revenue per resident.
As mentioned earlier, Brookings functions as a facility provider for programming. To continue growing the program revenue per
participant, it would be ideal to have a gradual yet continued evaluation of fees and charges to ensure they reflect the market rates
and the value of the experience provided.
Agency Population Total Program
Participations
Participations
per Resident
Hays PD 20,510 11,000 0.54
Kearney PRD 34,301 18,000 0.52
Brookings PRFD 24,337 3,200 0.13
Laramie PRD 33,295 2,500 0.08
Note: Participation numbers were not available for Aberdeen PRFD
Agency Population Total Program
Revenue
Program
Revenue per
Resident
Laramie PRD 33,295 293,640$ 8.82$
Brookings PRFD 24,337 103,500$ 4.25$
Hays PD 20,510 574,632$ 28.02$
Note: Program Revenue was not available for Aberdeen PRFD or
Kearney PRD
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
43
PROGRAM COST RECOVERY
Similar to the overall cost recovery, each agency’s cost recovery levels for programs were assessed by dividing total program
revenues by the direct cost to provide them. Brookings falls second amongst benchmark agencies at 151%.
It should be noted, with agencies tracking direct/indirect costs to various degrees, the Department shouldn’t make inferences solely
on this operational cost recovery comparison, but rather focus on their own programs’ cost recovery.
2.3.3 SUMMARY OF BENCHMARK FINDINGS
As a whole, the peer agencies selected are well performing park systems which allows Brookings to benchmark itself. Specific areas
where study participants perform to an exceptional level include: acres per 1,000 residents, trails per 1,000 residents, staffing
levels, operational spending, and earned income.
The benchmark comparison validated the strong performance of Brookings in many areas, such as park acres per 1,000 residents,
trail per 1,000 residents, operating expenses per resident, and revenue per resident. These strengths speak to the investment in
the system by the City, as well as the ability of the staff to offer high quality parks and services for the community. Brookings is
also at the NRPA Median for operational cost recovery at 26%.
The benchmark study also uncovered some limitations and opportunities for Brookings. The level of staffing per acre at 0.01 is
below the external average of 0.03, operational cost recovery, CIP usage on development, and marketing as percentage of
operations are four areas where Brookings falls below the benchmark median and/or national best practices.
Additionally, while Brookings is fairly low on the program revenue per resident, which is due to being a facility provider. However,
fees/charges for use of these facilities should be examined to ensure they are at market rates. There also could be an opportunity
to increase non-tax revenue, in order to better offset operating expenses, by revamping or extending the current pricing philosophy
for programs and rentals, as well as investing in a revenue generating signature facility (e.g., a multi-generation center).
Overall, the benchmark analysis reveals that Brookings is a strong park system, especially given the number of parks it operates
and maintains. The perspective gained through the peer comparison is valuable in identifying areas for improvement and
establishing strategic goals to pursue (E.g., Brookings should use this analysis as a baseline comparison that provides key
performance indicators (KPIs) to be tracked and measures over time.
Agency Total Program
Revenue
Total
Operating
Expense for
Programs
Operational
Cost Recovery
for Programs
Laramie PRD 293,640$ 160,000$ 184%
Brookings PRFD 103,500$ 68,400$ 151%
Hays PD 574,632$ 534,158$ 108%
Note: Program Operating Expenses were not available for Aberdeen
PRFD or Kearney PRD
44
CHAPTER THREE – C OMMUNITY E NGAGEMENT
Brooking launched the Master Plan in October 2020, which included a robust public engagement process to inventory the current
conditions of the system and to help determine the needs and priorities for the future. The planning process incorporated a variety
of input from the community. This included a series of key stakeholder interviews and focus group discussions, a statistically valid
survey, and an online community survey. Strategies included the following outreach methods:
• Conducted 6 Community Focus Groups
• 16 Stakeholder Interviews with City Council and Park Board
• Staff SWOT Analysis
• Statistically-Valid Survey
o Goal was 375, received 432 responses
o Mailed to 2,800 households
o Precision of +/- 4.6% at the 95% level of confidence
o Residents were able to return the survey by mail, by phone or completing it online
• Online Survey
o 565 responses (More than Expected)
o Available for one month
o Emulated the Statistically-Valid Survey
o Provides further insight on community expectations
The following sections in this chapter summarize and highlight the key findings from each stage of the community engagement
process.
3.1 KEY STAKEHOLDER AND FOCUS GROUP SUMMARY
3.1.1 OVERVIEW
As part of the Master Plan, key stakeholder interviews were conducted in November and December 2020 to provide a foundation
for identifying community issues and key themes. The interviews provide valuable insight and will assist in the development of
question topics that will be beneficial for the statistically-valid community survey. A facilitation guide was developed that included
a series of questions that spurred conversation and follow up questions were asked when appropriate. Invited stakeholders were
identified by the Brookings Parks, Recreation & Forestry Department (Department) staff and included representatives, and
approximately 60 members of the community from the following entities:
• City Council Members • Brookings Lacrosse
• City of Brookings Mayor • Brookings Ice Skating Association
• Parks Board Members • Brookings Figure Skating
• City Manager and Asst. City Manager • Great After School Place (G.A.P.)
• South Dakota State University • Brookings Community Band
• Mountain Bike Group • Brookings Arts Council
• Adult Softball • Brookings Co Youth Mentoring
• Adult Baseball • Brookings Youth Volleyball
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
45
• Brookings Tennis Association • Arts Festival Committee
• Brookings Basketball Association • Disability Committee
• Brookings Fellowship of Christian Athletes • Sustainability Committee
• Brookings School District • Bike Committee
• Brookings Futbol Club • Visit Brookings
• Friends of Baseball • Downtown Brookings
• Brookings Aquatics Club • Brookings Fastpitch
After speaking with the many stakeholders and interest groups, it is apparent the pride the community has in the Department and
what they can accomplish with their allocated resources. Quality of the parks and maintenance was a key theme, along with the
accessibility to an abundant number and type of different park experiences.
3.1.2 VISION FOR THE PARKS AND RECREATION SYSTEM
Residents would like to see enhancement of the existing park system through capital improvement repair, as well as for ongoing
maintenance; in other words, take care of what we already own. Outside of parks, facilities that were mentioned for capital
improvements were the youth baseball/softball fields. Other comments included activating the current parks through more
programming and the current amenities are replaced as they near the end of their lifecycle.
From an equity perspective, as new development continues to the south, we need to ensure residents in those areas have access to
parks and connections to the bike trail. Also, regarding trails, the current bike/trail plan needs to be implemented. Other residents
have a vision that the Department should offer parks and programs that are inclusive and available to all age groups and
socioeconomic backgrounds.
Among comments about facilities, residents would like to see indoor programming space that is flexible, multipurpose, and could
be programmed year-round. Long winters, along with limited access to the University and School District facilities, residents want
to see programs year-round that are open to the community. Indoor aquatic space was also mentioned by residents because these
two facilities are aging, and access to the pools operated by the school district and the SDSU is limiting. A vision of the Department,
SDSU, and the School District building a pool together was mentioned. A standalone pickleball court was also mentioned by residents
along with more active senior programming as the City is becoming a destination for retirees.
For financing the system, residents want to see the system go to the “next level” and have the best parks and facilities that they
are capable of maintaining and funding. Although the system already has fantastic parks, incremental investment is needed for
enhancements.
Operationally, residents would like to see the Department appropriately staffed to ensure parks are well-maintained. Other
considerations included implementing “no mow” zones to save money so those funds could be used for more staff or programs.
Those interviewed felt the Department should continue to be a priority by elected officials since they are vital to Brookings’ quality-
of-life.
3.1.3 RESIDENTS VALUE THE MOST
Residents understand that the park system contributes to the overall quality of life, and they value the size and scope of the park
system and the investment the City has made in parks. The trail connectivity, green space, outdoor facilities (e.g., sports facilities,
golf course, Nature Park, among others), and the diversity of park types in the system are also enjoyed by the residents interviewed.
Maintenance was mentioned as an overall value by the community, as residents feel the Department is doing the best they can with
the resources available given the number of parks it maintains.
Regarding programs, residents enjoy the diversity of programs that include summer camps, aquatics, disc golf, ice skating,
pickleball, youth and senior programming, as well as the access to programs for all people in the City, regardless of income level.
46
Residents value the many partnerships that the Department has with various sports groups, the school district, and SDSU.
3.1.4 CHALLENGES FACING THE DEPARTMENT
Challenges mentioned by residents include difficulties for land acquisition. Land is becoming less available and what land does
remain has significant drainage problems. While mentioned in a positive way, it is challenging for the Department to maintain the
system with insufficient staffing resources to maintain all parks in the system. A great number of amenities in the park system are
reaching the end of their lifecycle and replacing these amenities will be costly. In addition to maintaining their own parks, the
Department takes care of several other properties such as school district property, retention ponds, downtown, and many others.
Another challenge is the lack of indoor programming space that can be used year-round. Currently, reserving facilities at the school
district or SDSU is difficult due to demand.
The Department works with many special interest sports groups and they may consider developing an Adult and Youth Sports
Association. The Association would consist of all interested parties to provide communication, and an online portal for booking
fields and court time since there is ongoing competition for use of fields and courts.
Budgeting and financing were consistently brought up by residents since the Department has extensive maintenance throughout the
system. Financing for capital projects and a dedicated funding source outside of the general fund was mentioned by residents. The
lack of capital dollars for enhancement of new indoor facilities (e.g., multipurpose indoor program space, and indoor aquatics, and
other facilities.) Residents would like the Department to make incremental steps to correct the indoor programming space problem.
Lastly, COVID-19 and its affect for conducting Department programs and the financial impact of the pandemic was brought up
consistently by residents.
3.1.5 KEY PROGRAMS AND SERVICES NOT OFFERED OR EXISTING THAT NEED IMPROVEMENT
Regarding programming, residents recognize that many of the youth sports programs are being run by individual private leagues
on park property. While this has been helpful for many of the club/private sports teams, there is concern that affordable programs
for the entire community may not be at the club/private level. A universal schedule for all sports leagues to access both parks and
school property was desired by many of the individuals’ representing sports leagues.
Seniors that were interviewed would like to see more activities for active seniors (e.g., pickleball, indoor walking programs, fitness,
and other age-appropriate programs). Additionally, more opportunities for adult programming are desired.
Year-round indoor programming was consistently mentioned by residents, as well as more opportunities for outdoor winter
recreation programming, and expanded year-round aquatics programs.
Expanded programs for special needs youth and adults was brought up by many residents. Expanding nature / environmental
programs at the Nature Center was mentioned, as well as more use by both schools and 4-H members
3.1.6 RECREATION FACILITIES AND PARK AMENITIES NEEDED
Residents expressed a strong desire for year-round multipurpose indoor programming space for people of all ages and abilities.
The last time a new community center facility was proposed and was attempted it became very expensive. PROS recommends a
feasibility study be done in advance based on what is reasonable and feasible, that has wide age segment appeals and is
multifunctional in design and this should be explored. A short-term solution could be using the school district’s Fifth Street Gym, the
Larson Ice Center while not in use for ice related programming, as well as a portion of the Swiftel Center. Currently, indoor
programming space is a premium given the demands by the school district and the sports leagues. Also, an “off ice” hockey training
area was mentioned.
Regarding aquatics, indoor aquatics space is desired and could be accomplished through a partnership with SDSU and the school
district since current facilities are nearing their lifecycle end. Also, upgrades to the City’s outdoor pool are needed to refresh the
tired look of the facility.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
47
Many residents want to see the Bike Trail completed, enhanced maintenance where the trail is rough, and the addition of a bridge
over I-29 to connect the eastside of Brookings. Other outdoor amenities included more nature/hiking trails, creation of a Farmer’s
Market, downtown greenspace, expansion of the cross-country ski-path from the Nature Park to the golf course, as well as
standalone pickleball courts. Additionally, some parks are in need of ADA accessibility such as portions of Pioneer Park and the
bandshell.
Other residents mentioned the youth baseball/softball fields need to be upgraded by potentially adding lights to some sports fields
including soccer and baseball/softball fields, allowing longer periods of use during the spring and fall.
3.1.7 AREAS OF THE SYSTEM THAT NEED MORE FOCUS
Many participants reiterated the Department should continue to focus on taking care of what they already own and make it better,
whether it be maintenance or improved amenities. This requires increasing the community standards for the quality of our parks,
as well as the investment in more maintenance staff.
The Department has turned into a “facility” provider and has minimal presence in the parks outside of maintenance staff. Residents
would like to see more programs conducted by the Department in parks. Especially sports programs for kids that may not play at
the club/private levels. It was also mentioned there should be a way to visually see the sports league schedules online for
permitting.
Partnership enhancements between the School District and the Parks Department should be completed with formal agreements, as
well as working more with SDSU. There could be other potential partnerships for indoor aquatic development between the City,
School District, and SDSU.
Additional recycling opportunities at parks and facilities was mentioned by many participants.
Other comments included improving marketing to include what the Department offers such as program offerings, a Bike Trail map,
and a directory of volunteer groups. This would assist those that are in charge of certain sports groups or organizations and would
include a database of activities, contacts, and schedules.
Discussions about programming included the expansion of programs for active seniors and “just fun” activities for young kids. The
scholarship programs for families in need should be expanded.
3.1.8 TOP PRIORITIES
Each participant was asked their top one or two priorities of the master plan. These priorities are listed below:
• Expanding the “no mow” program and adding pollinator plantings.
• Additional opportunities for the community gardens.
• Upgrades to Pioneer Park, specifically the walking paths.
• More nature-based programming.
• Completion of the Bike Trail.
• Expansion of programming for all age groups.
• ADA Accessibility as we build or upgrade parks, as well as additions of Accessible playground equipment.
• Addition of a downtown “pocket park” element and green space.
• Playground for families with netting near the baseball fields and batting cages.
• Offer programs to all socioeconomic groups.
• Another sports complex for games and tournaments as well as relieve practices schedules.
48
• Facilities that have a court are now school controlled. A non-school controlled facility would allow for more winter
activities.
• Outdoor pickleball courts – six to eight – with restrooms and a shaded area.
• Senior programming for Active Seniors; programming needs to match population.
• Expand cross-country skiing.
• An indoor facility for programming. Need to be creative on financing but needs to get done.
• Tightening up the communication between youth / adult sports and the Department.
• Aquatics facility that serves the whole community.
• Lacrosse competition field that allows it to be visible to the community.
• A 5-10-year facility plan that takes into account the needs of the Schools, University and City, that would allow for a
multi-use indoor facility.
• Improvement to the youth baseball / softball fields.
• Additional lighted fields.
• Prioritization on maintaining what we have. Maintenance replacement schedule.
• Extension of the Bike Trail over I-29 to connect SDSU, as well as complete the whole loop.
• Programs to extend our outdoor winter programming.
• Indoor Aquatics Center.
• Additional program opportunities for lower income families.
• Multipurpose indoor programming space for year-round multiuse.
• Awareness of kids with special needs.
• More programs for active seniors. Expansion of senior programming with the Department.
• Opportunities for the Department to provide Mobile Recreation to youth.
• Ways to use art in indoor space.
• Working with community development on new growth / expansion
• Equity in where parks are located.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
49
3.2 STATISTICALLY-VALID NEEDS ASSESSMENT SURVEY
3.2.1 OVERVIEW
ETC Institute administered a community interest and opinion survey in March 2021 for the City of Brookings, South Dakota. This
study was administered as part of the City’s efforts in updating its Parks and Recreation System Master Plan. In this process, it is
important for the City to identify future priorities of recreation and parks amenities, facilities, programs, and activities. Information
gathered from the assessment will provide data that will help determine priorities which then leaders can use to make decisions
that will meet community and resident needs.
3.2.2 METHODOLOGY
ETC Institute mailed a survey packet to a random sample of households in the City of Brookings. Each survey packet contained a
cover letter, a copy of the survey, and a postage-paid return envelope. Residents who received the survey were given the option of
returning the survey by mail or completing it online at www.BrookingsSurvey.org.
Approximately seven to ten days after the surveys were mailed, ETC Institute sent emails to the households that received the survey
to encourage participation. The emails contained a link to the online version of the survey to make it simple for residents to
complete. To prevent people who were not residents of the City from participating, everyone who completed the survey online was
required to enter their home address prior to submitting the survey. ETC Institute then matched the addresses that were entered
online with the addresses that were originally selected for the random sample. If the address from a survey completed online did
not match one of the addresses selected for the sample, the online survey was not counted.
The goal was to obtain 375 completed surveys from City residents. A total of 432 surveys were collected. The overall results for a
sample of 432 surveys have a precision of at least +/- 4.6% at the 95% level of confidence.
The full report can be found in the Appendix 3, and it contains the following:
• Charts showing the overall results of the survey (Section 1)
• Benchmark Analysis comparing the City’s results to national results (Section 2)
• Priority Investment Ratings (PIR) Analysis that identifies priorities for facilities/ amenities and programs/ activities in the
community (Section 3)
• Tabular Data showing the overall results for all questions on the survey (Section 4)
• A copy of the survey instrument (Section 5)
The major findings of the survey are summarized below and on the following pages.
50
3.2.3 AMENITY, FACILITY, AND PARK USE AND RATINGS
CITY PARK AND FACILITY USE
Residents surveyed were asked, in the last 12-months, if they or members of their household have used any parks or facilities
offered by the Brookings Parks, Recreation, and Forestry Department. Eighty-six percent of residents indicated they have and 14%
responded that they have not.
CITY PARK AND FACILITY RATINGS
Of the residents that had indicated they have used a park/facility in the last 12-months (86%); 39% gave the overall quality of
parks/facilities a rating of excellent, 52% gave the overall quality of parks/facilities a rating of good, 8% rated the overall quality
of parks/facilities as fair, and less than a percent (0.5%) of residents gave the overall quality of parks/facilities a rating of poor.
The chart below shows the ratings respondents’ gave for the overall quality of parks/facilities.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
51
SATISFACTION WITH PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES
The services that residents are most satisfied with, based on the sum of very satisfied and satisfied responses, are:
• maintenance of parks/facilities (79%),
• overall quality of sports fields (72%),
• amount of open greenspace (71%), and
• park and facility accessibility (68%).
The Parks and Recreation services that residents think should receive the most attention from Brookings over the next five years,
based on the sum of respondents’ top three choices, are:
• amount of available indoor space (40%),
• connectivity of trails and pathways (33%),
• maintenance of parks/facilities (22%), and
• quality/number of outdoor amenities (19%).
52
3.2.4 AMENITY, FACILITY AND PARK NEEDS AND PRIORITIES
FACILITY NEEDS
Respondents were asked to identify if their household had a need for 32 facilities and rate how well their needs for each were
currently being met. Based on this analysis, ETC Institute was able to estimate the number of households in the community that had
the greatest “unmet” need for various facilities. The four facilities with the highest percentage of households whose needs for
facilities are being met 50% or less are listed below.
• Indoor Swimming Pools/Leisure Pool: 3,762 households (or 38%)
• Indoor Running/Walking Track: 3,327 households (or 34%)
• Sledding Hill: 3,019 households (or 31%)
• Indoor Fitness and Exercise Facilities: 2,620 households (26%)
The estimated number of households that have unmet needs for each of the 32 facilities that were assessed is shown below.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
53
FACILITY IMPORTANCE
In addition to assessing the needs for each facility, ETC Institute also assessed the importance that residents placed on each one.
Based on the sum of respondents’ top four choices, the most important facilities to residents were:
• walking/hiking trails (45%),
• paved bike trails (36%),
• natural areas and wildlife habitats (27%), and
• small neighborhood parks (26%).
The percentage of residents who selected each facility as one of their top four choices is depicted in below.
54
PRIORITIES FOR FACILITY/AMENITY INVESTMENTS
The Priority Investment Rating (PIR) was developed by ETC Institute to provide organizations with an objective tool for evaluating
the priority that should be placed on Parks and Recreation investments. The Priority Investment Rating (PIR) equally weighs (1) the
importance that residents place on each facility/amenity/program and (2) how many residents have unmet needs for the
facility/amenity/program. Details regarding the methodology for this analysis are provided in Section 3 of the report. Based on the
Priority Investment Rating (PIR), the five facilities were rated as high priorities for investment are listed below.
• Walking/Hiking Trails (PIR=155.7)
• Indoor Swimming Pools/Leisure Pool (PIR=136.6)
• Indoor Running/Walking Track (PIR=119.5)
• Paved Bike Trails (PIR=114.7)
• Natural Areas and Wildlife Habitats (PIR=108.6)
The chart below shows the PIR for each facility that was rated.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
55
3.2.5 PROGRAM AND ACTIVITY USE AND RATINGS
PROGRAM PARTICIPATION
Three out of ten residents (30%) indicated that they or members of their household have participated in recreation programs,
offered by the Parks, Recreation, and Forestry Department, in the last 24-months. Seven out of ten residents (70%) indicated they
have not participated in recreation programs offered in the last 24-months.
PROGRAM RATINGS
Of the households that indicated they have participated in recreation programs in the last 24-months (30%); 29% rated the overall
quality of programs a rating of excellent, 60% rated the overall quality of programs as good, and 12% rated the overall quality of
programs as fair.
56
PREFERRED TIME OF DAY FOR VARIOUS AGE GROUPS TO PARTICIPATE
A portion of this survey was created to analyze what the preferred time of day, for different age groups (children, youth, teen,
adults, older adults, and the family), to participate in recreation programs. The most preferred time of day for each age group is
below.
• There is not a significant preferred time of day for households with children (under the age of 6 years old) to participate
in programs. Twenty-seven percent (27%) of households with children indicated the evening (27%), then morning (26%),
afternoon (23%), and 24% said anytime is the best preferred time.
• The most preferred time of day for households with youth (6 to 12 years old) to participate in programs is the evening
(29%), followed by anytime (27%) and afternoon.
• The most preferred time of day for households with teens (13 to 17 years old) to participate in programs is the evening
(37%).
• The most preferred time of day for adults (18 to 59 years old) to participate in programs is the evening (54%).
• Thirty-nine percent (39%) of households with older adults (60 years or older) indicated that the most preferred times of
the day to participate in programs is anytime and the morning (27%).
• The preferred times of day for families to use recreation programs are the evening (44%) and anytime (37%)
PROGRAM NEEDS
Respondents were asked to identify if their household had a need for 26 programs and rate how well their needs for each were
currently being met. Based on this analysis, ETC Institute was able to estimate the number of households in the community that had
the greatest “unmet” need for various programs. The four programs with the highest percentage of households whose needs are
being met 50% or less are listed below.
• Adult Fitness and Wellness Programs: 3,405 households (34%)
• Travel and Tourism (day trips): 2,474 households (25%)
• Water Fitness Programs: 2,360 households (24%)
• Nature Programs: 2,089 households (21%)
The estimated number of households that have unmet needs for each of the 26 programs that were assessed is shown below.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
57
PROGRAM IMPORTANCE
In addition to assessing the needs for each program, ETC Institute also assessed the importance that residents placed on each one.
Based on the sum of respondents’ top four choices, the most valuable programs to residents were:
adult fitness and wellness programs (32%),
• nature programs (21%),
• youth learn to swim programs (18%), and
• water fitness programs (16%).
The percentage of residents who selected each program as one of their top four choices is depicted below.
58
PRIORITIES FOR PROGRAM INVESTMENTS
Details regarding the methodology for this analysis are provided above on Page v and in Section 3 of the Findings Report. Based on
the Priority Investment Rating (PIR), the five programs were rated as high priorities for investment are listed below.
• Adult Fitness and Wellness Programs (PIR=200.0)
• Nature Programs (PIR=127.0)
• Water Fitness Programs (PIR=119.2)
• Special Events (PIR=107.7)
• Travel and Tourism/Day Trips (PIR=107.7)
The chart below shows the PIR for each program that was rated.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
59
3.2.6 ADDITIONAL FINDINGS
ORGANIZATIONS USED FOR INDOOR/OUTDOOR RECREATION ACTIVITIES
From a list of eleven (11) organizations available for indoor/outdoor recreation activity use, respondent households were asked
what organizations they have used during the last 12-months. The top three organizations, that the highest percentage of
respondents have visited in the last 12-months, are:
• Brookings Parks, and Forestry Department (57%),
• Churches (44%), and
• South Dakota State University (38%).
The two organizations used by the least percentage of residents are the Boys and Girls Club (12%) and homeowners
associations/apartment complex (7%).
60
METHODS RESIDENTS USE TO LEARN ABOUT PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Residents surveyed were given fourteen (14) methods of communication used for residents to learn about Brookings Parks,
Recreation, and Forestry Department programs and services. The top three methods of communication, that the highest percentage
of respondents use most to learn about programs and services, are: From friends and neighbors (56%), Newspaper articles (47%),
and the website (44%).
The methods that residents indicated are their most preferred ways to learn about programs and services, based on the sum of
respondents’ top three choices, are: By the website (41%), Department program guide (35%), Newspaper articles (34%), and
Facebook (34%).
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
61
BARRIERS TO FACILITY AND/OR PROGRAM USE/PARTICIPATION
From a list of twenty-one (21) potential reasons, respondent households were asked to indicate the reasons that deter them from
using parks, recreation facilities, or programs that are offered by Brookings Parks, Recreation, and Forestry more often. The top
four reasons/barriers given, by residents, were:
• I do not know what is being offered (24%),
• we are too busy (19%),
• program or facility is not offered (15%), and
• program times are not convenient (12%).
Twenty-seven percent (27%) of residents surveyed responded that nothing deters them/their household from participating in or
using parks/recreation facilities or programs.
62
PROGRAM COSTS
Residents surveyed were asked to indicate their opinion about what percent of Brookings Parks, Recreation, and Forestry
Department program costs should be paid by taxes and what percentage should be paid by user fees. The table below shows the
sum percentage of residents that indicated program costs should be paid by 25% to 100% of taxes. The top three programs, that
residents think costs should be paid by a percentage (25%-100%) of taxes, are: programs for special populations/disabled (95%),
programs for low-income residents (94%), and learn to swim programs (91%).
The top three programs, that residents think costs should be paid by a percentage (25%-100%) of user fees, are: adult sports
programs (96%), adult classes such as exercise, arts, dance, etc. (96%), and field rentals for adult sports tournaments (95%).
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
63
POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS
Residents were asked to give their opinion on how much they would support actions that Brookings Parks could take to improve the
Parks and Recreation system. The actions with the highest levels of support, based on the sum of very supportive and somewhat
supportive responses by residents who had an opinion, are listed below.
• Improve existing paved walking and biking trails (82%)
• Improve existing small neighborhood parks (80%)
• Improve existing large community parks (80%)
The potential actions that are most important to residents, based on the sum of respondents’ top three choices, are: improve existing
paved walking and biking trails (33%), develop new trails that connect to existing trails (29%), and develop a new indoor recreation
center (25%).
64
IMPROVEMENT FUNDING
The level of support that households have for potential funding mechanisms that could be used to pay for improvements are listed
below. Based on the sum of very supportive and somewhat supportive responses, the top three potential funding mechanisms
residents support to pay for improvements, are: program user fees for recreational programs (71%), enterprise operations (68%),
and hotel tax (66%).
The potential funding mechanisms that residents most support, based on the sum of respondents’ top three choices, are a hotel tax
(41%) and program user fees for recreational programs (39%).
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
65
FUNDING PRIORITIES
Residents were asked to give their opinion on how to budget and allocate funds among categories of funding that were listed. If
residents were given $100 (hypothetically), based on survey results, how they would prioritize funding is listed below.
• $27.69 for developing indoor facilities.
• $21.53 for constructing new walking and biking trails and to improve existing trails where needed.
• $14.50 for improving existing neighborhood and community parks.
• $12.89 for improving existing outdoor facilities.
• $12.54 for acquiring new parkland and open space for parks.
• $10.85 for developing additional outdoor facilities.
66
3.2.7 RECOMMENDATIONS
To ensure that the City of Brookings continues to meet the needs and expectations of the community, ETC Institute recommends that
the Parks and Recreation Department sustain and/or improve the performance in the areas that were rated as high priorities, as
indicated by the Priority Investment Rating (PIR).
The facilities and programs with the highest PIR ratings are listed below
FACILITY PRIORITY INVESTMENTS
• Walking/Hiking Trails (PIR=155.7)
• Indoor Swimming Pools/Leisure Pool (PIR=136.6)
• Indoor Running/Walking Track (PIR=119.5)
• Paved Bike Trails (PIR=114.7)
• Natural Areas and Wildlife Habitats (PIR=108.6)
PROGRAM PRIORITY INVESTMENTS
• Adult Fitness and Wellness Programs (PIR=200.0)
• Nature Programs (PIR=127.0)
• Water Fitness Programs (PIR=119.2)
• Special Events (PIR=107.7)
• Travel and Tourism/Day Trips (PIR=107.7)
3.3 ELECTRONIC SURVEY
An online survey (powered by SurveyMonkey) was completed to gain a better understanding of the
characteristics, preferences, and satisfaction levels of Brookings Parks, Recreation, & Forestry
users. The survey was open for just over five weeks, from March 22nd through April 28th, 2021,
and received a total of 565 responses.
This online survey mirrored the statistically-valid survey conducted back by ETC Institute. This
allowed residents who may have not been randomly selected to participated in the statistically-
valid surveys an opportunity to be part of the community input process. The results of the
Electronic Survey can be found in Appendix 3.
An important distinction is made between the general Online Community Survey and the Statistically-Valid Survey (besides the
statistical validity of the results); that is, 30% of the Statistically-Valid Surveys were taken by current or recent users of the system
compared with 46% of the general Online Community Survey participants being current or recent users. Therefore, the Statistically-
Valid Survey provides a more representative sample of the City’s population as a whole, while the Online Community Survey
provides (potentially) more insight to existing user opinion.
Overall, the findings from the Online Community Survey are rather similar to the Statistically-Valid Survey results. In many
instances, the results mirror each other. The following pages outline the key takeaways from a comparison of both surveys.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
67
3.3.1 KEY SURVEY SIMILARITIES
The following response areas generated similar results between both surveys.
PROGRAM PARTICIPATION
Program participation was approximately 16% greater in the Online Community Survey (46%) versus the ETC Statistically-Valid
Survey (30%).
Online Community Survey ETC Statically-Valid Online Survey
PREFERRED COMMUNICATION METHODS
Both surveys resulted in the same top three preferences regarding preferred communication methods.
Online Community Survey Statistically-Valid Survey
1. Website 1. Website
2. Facebook 2. Department Program Guide
3. Department Program Guide 3. Facebook
PARTICIPATION BARRIERS
The top three barriers for more participation were also the same for both the Online Community Survey and the ETC Statistically-
Valid Survey.
Online Community Survey Statistically-Valid Survey
1. I don’t know what is being offered 1. I don’t know what is being offered
2. Program or facility not offered 2. We are too busy
3. We are too busy 3. Program or facility not offered
46%
54%
Yes
No
30%
70%
Yes
No
68
PARKS/FACILITIES NEEDS
The top five most “needed” facilities/amenities were the same for both surveys with just the order of priority reversed on some
amenities
Online Community Survey Statistically-Valid Survey
1. Walking/hiking trails 1. Walking/hiking trails
2. Large community parks 2. Small neighborhood parks
3. Paved bike trails 3. Natural areas and wildlife habitats
4. Small neighborhood parks 4. Large community parks
5. Natural areas and wildlife habitats 5. Paved bike trails
PROGRAM NEEDS
Three of the top five “needed” programs were the same in both the Online Community Survey and the ETC Statistically-Valid Survey
(Adult fitness and wellness programs, Nature programs, and Canoeing/ kayaking).
Online Community Survey Statistically-Valid Survey
1. Adult fitness and wellness programs 1. Adult fitness and wellness programs
2. Youth Learn to Swim programs 2. Nature programs
3. Youth sports programs 3. Canoeing and kayaking
4. Nature programs 4. Special events
5. Canoeing and kayaking 5. Water fitness programs
MOST IMPORTANT IMPROVEMENT ACTIONS
When analyzing the most important improvement actions, four of the top five actions were the same in both surveys. With the only
difference being action item #5 switching from “Improving existing swimming pools” to “Improve existing nature preserves”.
Online Community Survey Statistically-Valid Survey
1. Develop new indoor recreation center 1. Improve existing paved walking and biking
trails
2. Develop new indoor swimming pool 2. Develop new trails that connect to existing
trails
3. Improve existing paved walking and biking
trails
3. Develop new indoor recreation center
4. Develop new trails that connect to existing
trails
4. Develop new indoor swimming pool
5. Improve existing swimming pools 5. Improve existing nature preserves
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
69
PARKS & RECREATION SERVICES NEEDING MOST ATTENTION
In reviewing the parks and recreation services that are in need of the most attention, both the Online Community Survey and the
ETC Statistically-Valid Survey had the same top five answers.
Online Community Survey Statistically-Valid Survey
1. Amount of available indoor recreation space 1. Amount of available indoor recreation space
2. Connectivity of trails and pathways 2. Connectivity of trails and pathways
3. Maintenance of parks/facilities 3. Maintenance of parks/facilities
4. Availability of information about programs
and facilities
4. Quality/number of outdoor amenities
5. Quality/number of outdoor amenities 5. Availability of information about programs
and facilities
3.3.2 IMPLICATIONS
After analyzing the data collected from the public engagement process, there are several public priorities that rose to the surface:
• Adult fitness and wellness programs and nature programs are top community priorities
• Walking/hiking trails, large community parks, paved bike trails, small neighborhood parks, and natural areas and
wildlife habitats are important park/facility needs
• Desire for an indoor aquatic facility and indoor recreation multi-purpose center
• There is a willingness to financially support improving and maintaining existing facilities/amenities as well as
developing new facilities
• Focusing on the City’s website, Facebook page, and Department Program Guide will be important in communication
efforts
• The community understands there is a need for tax subsidy AND user fees to help sustain the system; additionally, there
is commonality among the type of services that should be more user fee-based and those that should be funded more
with tax dollars
70
CHAPTER FOUR – PARKS, FACILITIES, AND PROGRAM ANALYSIS
4.1 PARK CLASSIFICATIONS
4.1.1 INTRODUCTION
In developing design principles for parks, it is important that each park be programmed, planned, and designed to meet the needs
of its service area and classification within the overall park and recreation system. Every park, regardless of type, needs to have
an established set of outcomes. Park planners/designers design to those outcomes, including operational and maintenance costs
associated with the design outcomes.
Each park classification category serves a specific purpose, and the features and facilities in the park must be designed for the
number of age segments the park is intended to serve, the desired length of stay deemed appropriate, and the uses it has been
assigned. Recreation needs and services require different design standards based on the age segments that make up the community
that will be using the park. A varying number of age segments will be accommodated with the park program depending on the
classification of the park. The age segments used for this purpose are broken into the following sets and subsets:
• Ages 0-17
o Ages 0-5
o Ages 6-12
o Ages 13-17
• Ages 18-34
o Ages 18-24
o Ages 25-34
• Ages 35-54
o Ages 35-44
o Ages 45-54
• Ages 55-74
o Ages 55-64
o Ages 65-74
• Ages 76+
DEFINITIONS
Land Usage: The percentage of space identified for active or passive use within a park. A park master plan should follow land
usage guidelines.
• Active Use: An area that requires more intensive development to support the desired recreation activities. Spaces are
designed specifically to encourage people to congregate and interact with each other. Active areas include built amenities,
such as playgrounds, splash pads, sports courts or fields, community centers, program pavilions, swimming pools,
rentable shelters, and similar amenities. Active may also be used in reference to a program or activity that requires a
more vigorous physical effort to participate, such as playing sports, swimming, working out, skating, etc.
• Passive Use: An area that has minimal to no development, usually for the purpose of providing non-programmed open
space and/or preserving or restoring natural habitat. Areas that are developed are designed to promote casual and
frequently self-directed activities, such as hiking, fishing, bird watching, wildlife viewing, picnicking, kite-flying, Frisbee,
or similar generally unstructured activities. Built amenities may include trails, boardwalks, fishing piers, benches, picnic
tables, grass meadows, etc. Passive may also be used in reference to a program or activity that requires minimal physical
exertion to participate, such as attending an arts and crafts class, continuing education program, etc.
Park/Facility Classifications: Includes Mini Park, Neighborhood Park, Community Park, Special Use Park/Facility, School
Grounds, Trails, and Nature Preserves/Open Space.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
71
Signature Facility/Amenity: This is an enhanced facility or amenity which is viewed by community as deserving of special
recognition due to its design, location, function, natural resources, etc. A signature facility/amenity is frequently synonymous with
the park from the general public’s perspective. A signature facility/amenity may also be a revenue facility. Examples include a
standalone sports complex, community center, waterpark, destination playground, amenities, or natural features.
Site Features: The specific types of facilities and amenities included within a park. Site features include such elements as a
community center, playground, splashpads, picnic shelters, restrooms, game courts, trails, open meadows, nature preserves, etc.
These types of amenities are categorized as lead or support amenities. Community demographics and needs should be considered
when identifying site features for a park.
Revenue Facilities: These include facilities that charge a fee to use in the form of an admission fee, player fee, team fee, or
permit fee. These could include pools, golf courses, tennis courts, recreation centers, sport field complexes, concession facilities,
hospitality centers, reservable shelters, outdoor or indoor theatre space, and special event spaces.
User Experiences: The type of intentional recreation experiences a user has available to them when visiting a park. A park master
plan should incorporate user experience recommendations based on the following types of experiences:
• Leader-Directed Experiences: An experience received from a facility, amenity, or service where participant
involvement is directed by a leader and supervision is required for participation. These experiences, usually provided
through an organized class, often promote skill development or learning, but may be for recreational purposes only.
Leader-directed experiences typically require advance registration and include a user fee to participate. Examples include
day camps, learn-to-swim programs, environmental education classes, sports leagues, etc. Certain types of special events,
such as concerts, 5K fun runs/walks, or similar events that rely on the performance or significant coordination of someone
to occur are also considered leader-directed experiences.
• Self-Directed Experience: An experience received from a facility, amenity or service that provides opportunities for
individuals or groups to participate independently and at their own pace. Supervision, when provided, is primarily to
promote safety or regulate attendance. A user fee may or may not be charged, depending on the setting. Advance
registration is often not required. Examples include playground or splashpad usage, picnicking, disc golf, nature walks,
walking a dog, etc. General use of a community center, such as using fitness equipment, using the gym or indoor aquatic
during open times, or walking the track, are also considered self-directed experiences.
4.1.2 PARK CLASSIFICATIONS
MINI PARKS
Mini parks are generally small, (usually four acres or less) and have a service area of one-quarter (1/4) mile or less. These parks
specialize in one or two types of services or facilities and are intended to the adjacent neighborhoods. As the neighborhood needs
change, the focus of mini parks can change. The parks typically contain a children’s play area, a picnic area, and possibly a basketball
court.
The City of Brookings inventory includes Indian Hills Park, Lions Park, Sarah Renee Park, Southside Park, and Valley View Park.
Mini parks are not designed to accommodate more than very limited recreation services. They are typically able to provide
recreation services for one user group such as a playground, splashpad, benches for walkers, landscape, and trails for enjoyment
of the natural environment or display of public artwork.
• Size of park: Mini Parks are usually under three acres in size. Anything larger would typically be considered a
neighborhood park.
• Service radius: Several City blocks or less than 1/4 mile in a residential setting.
• Site selection: Servicing a specific recreation need, ease of access from the surrounding area, and linkage to the community
pathway system are key concerns when selecting a site. Ideally, it will have adjacency to other park system components,
72
most notably greenways, and the trail system. Location is determined by the needs of the neighborhood, partnership
opportunities and the availability and accessibility of land.
• Length of stay: One-hour experience or less.
• Site features: Community input through the public meeting process needs to be the primary determinant of the
development program for this type of park. Mini Parks are not designed to accommodate more than very limited recreation
use. They are typically able to provide recreation use for one user group such as a playground or splash pad for youth,
benches for walkers, landscape, and trails for enjoyment of the natural environment or display of artwork for the local
neighborhood. Amenities are ADA compliant. Although demographics and population density play a role in location, the
justification for a Mini Park lies more in servicing a specific recreation need or taking advantage of a unique opportunity.
Given the potential variety of Urban Plaza activities and locations, services can vary.
• Landscape design: Appropriate design to enhance the park theme/use/experience.
• Revenue facilities: None.
• Land usage: 90% active/10% passive. The character may be one of intensive use or aesthetic enjoyment. Area businesses
and residents should be encouraged to assist in policing and the day-to-day maintenance of this type of park, as they are
located in downtown areas. The primary function of such a park is to provide recreation space to those areas of the City
where population densities limit the available open space.
• User experiences: Predominately self-directed, but a signature amenity may be included which provides opportunities for
leader-directed programs. Depending on the size and location, special events could be activated.
• Maintenance standards: Dependent on-site features, landscape design, and park visitation.
• Signage: Directional signage and facility/amenity regulations to enhance user experience.
• Parking: Parking is typically not required.
• Lighting: Site lighting is typically used for security and safety.
• Naming: Consistent with the agency’s naming policy for naming of parks, such as being named after a prominent or historic
person, event, or natural landmark.
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
A neighborhood park is typically 3-10 acres in size; however, some neighborhood parks are determined by use and facilities offered
and not by size alone. The service radius for a neighborhood park is one half mile or six blocks. Neighborhood parks should have
safe pedestrian access for surrounding residents; parking may or may not be included but if included accounts for less than ten cars
and provides for ADA access. Neighborhood parks serve the recreational and social focus of the adjoining neighborhoods and
contribute to a distinct neighborhood identity.
Currently, the Department has many neighborhood parks within its inventory such as Arrowhead Park, Camelot Park, McClemans
Park, and Moriarty Park.
• Size of park: 3 to 10 acres (usable area measured). Preferred size is eight acres.
• Service radius: 0.5-mile radius.
• Site selection: On a local or collector street. If near an arterial street, provide natural or artificial barrier from traffic.
Where possible, next to a school. Encourage location to link subdivisions and linked by trails to other parks.
• Length of stay: One-hour experience or less.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
73
• Site features: One signature amenity (e.g., playground, splashpad, sport court, gazebo); no restrooms unless necessary
for a signature amenity; may include one non-programmed sports field; playgrounds for ages 2-5 and 5-12 with some
shaded elements; typically, no reservable shelters; loop trails; one type of sport court; no non-producing/unused
amenities; benches, small picnic shelter(s) next to play areas. Amenities are ADA compliant.
• Landscape design: Appropriate design to enhance the park theme/use/experience. Customized to demographics of
neighborhood; safety design meets established Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) standards;
integrated color scheme throughout.
• Revenue facilities: None.
• Land usage: 85% active/15% passive.
• User experiences: Typically, self-directed, but a signature amenity may be included which provides opportunities for
leader-directed programs.
• Maintenance standards: Dependent on-site features, landscape design, and park visitation.
• Signage: Directional signage to the park, as well as within the park, and facility/amenity regulations to enhance user
experience.
• Parking: Design should include widened on-street parking area adjacent to park, when feasible. Goal is to maximize usable
park space. As necessary, provide 5-10 spaces within park including accessible parking spaces. Traffic calming devices
encouraged next to park.
• Lighting: Security only. Lighting on all night for security.
• Naming: Consistent with the agency’s naming policy for naming of parks, such as being named after a prominent or historic
person, event, donor, or natural landmark.
COMMUNITY PARK
Community parks provide diverse recreation opportunities to serve the residents of Brookings. These include active and passive
recreation, as well as self-directed and organized recreation opportunities for individuals, families, and small groups. Community
Parks often include facilities that promote outdoor recreation and activities such as walking and biking, picnicking, playing sports,
playing on playgrounds, and fishing. These sites also include natural areas, emphasizing public access to important natural features.
Since community parks may attract people from a wide geographic area, support facilities are required, such as parking and
restrooms. Self-directed recreation activities such as meditation, quiet reflection, and wildlife watching also take place at community
parks.
Community parks generally range from 10 to 100 acres depending on the surrounding community. Community parks serve a larger
area – radius of one to three miles – and contain more recreation amenities than a neighborhood park. Currently, the City of
Brookings has many Community Parks that include Dwiggins-Medary Park, Hillcrest Park, Larson Park, Pioneer Park, and Sexauer
Park & Campground.
• Size of park: 10 to 100 acres, but ideally 20 to 40 acres.
• Service radius: One to three-mile radius.
• Site selection: On two collector streets minimum and preferably one arterial street. If near arterial street, provide natural
or artificial barrier from traffic. Minimal number of residences abutting site. Preference for adjacent or nearby proximity
with school or other municipal use. Encourage trail linkage to other parks.
• Length of stay: Two to three hours experience.
74
• Site features: Four signature amenities at a minimum: (e.g., trails, sports fields, large shelters/ pavilions, community
playground for ages 2-5 and 5-12 with some shaded elements, recreation center, pool or family aquatic center, sports
courts, water feature); public restrooms with drinking fountains, ample parking, and security lighting. Amenities are ADA
compliant. Multi-purpose fields are appropriate in this type of park.
• Landscape design: Appropriate design to enhance the park theme/use/experience. Enhanced landscaping at park
entrances and throughout park.
• Revenue facilities: One or more (e.g., picnic shelters, program pavilion, dog park).
• Land usage: 65% active and 35% passive.
• User experiences: Mostly self-directed experiences, but may have opportunities for leader-directed programs based on
available site features and community demand.
• Maintenance standards: Dependent on-site features, landscape design, and park visitation.
• Signage: Directional signage to the park, as well as within the park, and facility/amenity regulations to enhance user
experience. May include kiosks in easily identified areas of the facility.
• Parking: Sufficient to support the amenities; occupies no more than 10% of the park. Design should include widened on-
street parking area adjacent to park. Goal is to maximize usable park space. Traffic calming devices encouraged within
and next to the park.
• Lighting: Security lighting and lighting appropriate for signature amenities.
• Naming: Consistent with the agency’s naming policy for naming of parks, such as being named after a prominent or historic
person, event, donor, or natural landmark.
• Other: Strong appeal to surrounding neighborhoods; integrated color scheme throughout the park; partnerships developed
with support groups, schools and other organizations; loop trail connectivity; linked to trail or recreation facility; safety
design meets established CPTED standards.
SPECIAL USE PARK
Special use parks are those spaces that do not fall within a typical park classification. A major difference between a special use park
and other parks is that they usually serve a single purpose whereas other park classifications are designed to offer multiple
recreation opportunities. It is possible for a special use facility to be located inside another park.
Special use parks generally contain one facility or amenity that falls into the following categories:
• Historic/Cultural/Social Sites – Unique local resources offering historical, educational, and cultural opportunities.
Examples include arboretums, memorials, historic downtown areas, commercial zones, arboretums, display gardens, and
amphitheaters. Frequently these are located in community or regional parks.
• Golf Courses – 9- and 18-hole complexes with ancillary facilities such as club houses, driving ranges, program space
and learning centers. These facilities are highly maintained and support a wide age level of males and females. Programs
are targeted for daily use play, tournaments, leagues, clinics and special events. Operational costs come from daily play,
season pass holders, concessions, driving range fees, earned income opportunities, and sale of pro shop items.
• Indoor Recreation Facilities – specialized or single purpose facilities. Examples include community centers, senior
centers, performing arts facilities, and community theaters. Frequently these are located in community or regional parks.
• Outdoor Recreation Facilities – Examples include aquatic parks, disk golf, skateboard, BMX, and dog parks, ski area,
standalone sports complex, which may be located in a park.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
75
The City of Brookings has many different special use facilities within its current inventory, such as Bark Park, Northbrook Community
Park Community Garden, Dakota Nature Park, Fishback Soccer Complex, Southbrook Softball Complex, and Edgebrook Golf Course.
• Size of park: Depends upon facilities and activities included. The diverse character of these parks makes it difficult to
apply acreage standards.
• Service radius: Depends upon facilities and activities included. Typically serves special user groups while a few serve the
entire population.
• Site selection: Given the variety of potential uses, no specific standards are defined for site selection. As with all park
types, the site itself should be located where it is appropriate for its use.
• Length of stay: Varies by facility.
• Site Features: Varies by facility.
• Revenue facilities: Due to nature of certain facilities, revenue may be required for construction and/or annual
maintenance. This should be determined at a policy level before the facility is planned and constructed.
• Land usage: Varies by facility.
• User experiences: Varies by facility.
• Maintenance standards: Dependent on-site features, landscape design, and park visitation.
• Signage: Directional signage to the park, as well as within the park, and facility/amenity regulations to enhance user
experience. May include kiosks in easily identified areas of the facility.
• Parking: On-street or off-street parking is provided as appropriate for facility.
• Lighting: Security lighting and lighting appropriate for facility.
• Landscape design: Appropriate design to enhance the park theme/use/experience.
• Naming: Consistent with the agency’s naming policy for naming of parks, such as being named after a prominent or historic
person, event, donor, or natural landmark.
• Other: Integrated color scheme throughout the park; safety design meets established CPTED standards.
SCHOOL GROUNDS
By combining the resources of two public agencies, such as the City of Brookings the Brookings School District, the school grounds
classification allows for expanding the recreation, social, and educational opportunities available to the community in an efficient
and cost-effective manner. Through a partnership agreement, the City uses schools for after school programming.
Facilities may include one to three meeting rooms, a kitchen, a game room, a computer lab, and a gym with either three volleyball
courts or two basketball courts. The important outcome in the joint-use relationship is that both the school district and the park
system benefit from shared use of facilities and land area.
Depending on circumstances, school grounds often complement other community open lands. As an example, an elementary school
can serve as neighborhood park providing a playground and open space to the surrounding community during non-school hours.
Similarly, a middle school or high school may serve in a number of capacities that could include indoor sport courts, athletic fields,
tennis courts, etc.
• Size: Variable as it depends on function.
• Location: Determined by location of school district property.
• Site features: May include playgrounds, tennis courts, basketball courts, athletic fields, and trails.
76
• Signage: Directional signage to the park, as well as within the park, and facility/amenity regulations to enhance user
experience. May include kiosks in easily identified areas of the School Grounds for public use.
• Recreation services: Mainly self-directed recreation activities. Where feasible, if athletic fields are developed on school
grounds, they are oriented to youth programming. Establishing a joint-use agreement is recommended to making school
ground designations work for both agencies. This is particularly important to maintenance, liability, use, and programming
of the facilities.
NATURE PRESERVES/OPEN SPACE
Nature preserves/open space are undeveloped but may include natural or paved trails. Grasslands under power line corridors are
one example and creek areas are another. Nature preserves/open space contain natural resources that can be managed for
recreation and natural resource conservation values such as a desire to protect wildlife habitat, water quality, and endangered
species. Nature preserves/open space also can provide opportunities for nature-based, self-directed, low-impact recreational
opportunities such as walking and nature viewing. These lands consist of:
• Individual sites exhibiting natural resources.
• Lands that are unsuitable for development but offer natural resource potential.
• Parcels with steep slopes and natural vegetation, drainage ways and ravines, surface water management areas (man-
made ponding areas), and utility easements.
• Protected lands, such as wetlands/lowlands and shorelines along waterways, lakes, and ponds.
The intent of nature preserves/open space is to enhance the livability and character of a community by preserving as many of its
natural amenities as possible. Integration of the human element with that of the natural environment that surrounds them enhances
the overall experience. The City of Brookings offers many unique nature preserves/open space parks that include Rotary Park,
Pheasant Nest, Brookings Prairie, and Gustafson Pond.
• Amenities: May include paved or natural trails, wildlife viewing areas, mountain biking, disc golf, nature interpretation,
and education facilities.
• Maintenance standards: Demand-based maintenance with available funding. Biological management practices observed.
• Lighting: None.
• Signage: Directional signage to the park, as well as within the park, and facility/amenity regulations to enhance user
experience. May include kiosks in easily identified areas of the facility.
• Landscape design: Generally, none. Some areas may include landscaping, such as entryways or around buildings. In these
situations, sustainable design is appropriate.
T RAILS
trails include natural and built corridors that typically support trail-oriented activities, such as walking, jogging, biking, skating, etc.
Trails function as linear parks by linking features together and providing green buffers. Trails may be located along abandoned
railroad lines, transportation or utility rights-of-way, riparian corridors, or elongated natural areas. Greenways/trails and linear
parks may be of various lengths and widths, and these corridors typically support facilities such as viewing areas, benches, and
trailheads. Trails between key destinations can help create more tightly-knit communities, provide opportunities for non-motorized
transportation, and link to the regional trail system. The Brookings Park system includes the main Ally Frerichs Trail, as well as
trails in Dakota Nature Park, and loop trails in other parks are examples of trails.
• Size: Typically, unencumbered land at least 30-feet wide. It may include a trail to support walk, bike, run, and sometimes
equestrian type activities. Usually, an urban trail is at minimum 10-feet wide to support pedestrian and bicycle uses. Trails
incorporate signage to designate where a user is located and where the trails connect in the community.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
77
• Site selection: Located consistent with approved a community’s comprehensive plan and/or alternative transportation
plan as appropriate.
• Amenities: Parking and restrooms at major trailheads. May include station points, which include a bench, drink fountain,
trail map, and bike repair station, pocket parks/public plazas along the trail.
• Maintenance standards: Dependent on-site features, landscape design, and park visitation.
• Lighting: Security lighting at trailheads is preferred. Lighting in urbanized areas or entertainment districts as appropriate.
• Signage: Mileage markers at half mile intervals. Interpretive kiosks as deemed appropriate.
• Landscape design: Coordinated planting scheme in urban areas. Limited or no landscape planting in open space areas with
a preference for maintaining natural areas as a buffer to neighbors.
• Other: Connectivity to parks or other community attractions and facilities is desirable.
4.2 PARKS AND FACILITIES ASSESSMENT
As part of the life-cycle asset plan, Confluence completed a park assessment of the entire Brookings park system. The full
Assessment is located in Appendix 3. The following pages outline the methodology and general findings.
In order to understand the current park, open space, and facility resources owned or managed by the City of Brookings Department
of Parks, Recreation, and Forestry, the Consulting Team completed an inventory and assessment of all of these resources and assets
in the fall of 2020. This assessment included a park tour by Department staff to gain an overview and feel of the system, followed
by individual trips to further analyze and assess the amenities.
The purpose of this assessment was to inventory the park system’s existing amenities, evaluate the condition and identify
opportunities for improvement. The assessment was utilized, along with other technical research reports, to assist with ‘Level of
Service’ analysis and the final Park and Recreation System Plan including recommendations and action strategies.
4.2.1 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
Each facility or amenity visited was inventoried and assessed for quality. The following sections, categorizations, and ratings were
used to asses each asset:
• Site Location & General Site Description: This section includes a physical address, the size of the asset,
classification of the amenity (ex, Neighborhood Park, Community Park, Special Use Park, etc.), and any special
maintenance requirements associated with the park or facility.
• Inventory of Amenities & Condition: This section includes a comprehensive list of amenities available at the site,
as well as a notation regarding ADA accessibility. The condition of each amenity is rated using a 3-point scale: Excellent
Condition (+); Good Condition (0); Needs Attention (-).
• Strengths & Opportunities: In this section, the Consultant lists the relative strengths and improvement
considerations associated with the resource. This can be used to inform maintenance priorities and the Capital
Improvement Plan.
• Photo Inventory: This section shows photos of the site at the time it was assessed, to complement the written
descriptions of the site’s current status.
78
4.2.2 PARK ASSESSMENT BY CLASSIFICATION
MINI PARKS
Mini Parks in Brookings consistently provide the following amenities:
• Park shelter
• Playground
• Sport court, generally basketball
• Limited site lighting
• Accessible walkways between amenities
• Park identification signage
Size: Varies from 2.3 acres (Lions Park) to 3.9 acres (Indian Hills Park) with a median size of 2.7 acres and an average of 3.8 acres.
Existing Mini Parks: Indian Hills Park, Lions Park, Sarah Renee Park, Southside Park, and Valley View Park
Evaluation & Opportunities: Opportunities for additional experiences at Mini Parks may include:
• Add ADA access to features, where missing
• Court improvements
• Playground equipment and surfacing updates
• Park signage updates
Indian Hills Park Southside Park
Valley View Park Sarah Renee Park
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
79
NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS
Neighborhood Parks in Brookings consistently provide the following amenities:
• Park shelter
• Park Restrooms (excluding McClemans Park)
• Playground
• Sport court, generally basketball (predominantly full court or multiple hoops)
• Flex field lawn area with backstop
• Recreation Trail or Trail Access
• Limited site lighting
• Park identification signage
Size: Varies from 3.4 acres (McClemans Park) to 11.6 acres (Arrowhead Park) with a median size of 7.3 acres and an average of 8.2
acres.
Existing Neighborhood Parks: Arrowhead Park, Camelot Park, McClemans Park, and Moriarty Park.
Evaluation & Opportunities: Opportunities for additional experiences at Neighborhood Parks may include:
• Add ADA access to features, where missing
• Court improvements
• Playground equipment and surfacing updates
• Add splash pad within park system
• Trail updates or expansion
• Park signage updates
Arrowhead Park Camelot Park
McClemmons Park Moriarty Park
80
COMMUNITY PARKS
Community Parks in Brookings consistently provide the following amenities:
• Park shelter
• Playground
• Sport court, generally basketball (predominantly half court)
• Flex field lawn area with backstop
• Drinking fountain
• Limited site lighting
• Accessible walkways between amenities
• Park identification signage
Size: Varies from 17.0 acres (Pioneer Park) to 22.5 acres (Dwiggins-Medary Park) with a median size of 19.2 acres and an average
of 19.38 acres.
Existing Community Parks: Dwiggins-Medary Park, Hillcrest Park, Larson Park, Pioneer Park, and Sexauer Park & Campground
Evaluation & Opportunities: Opportunities for additional experiences at Community Parks may include:
• Add Miracle Ballfield
• Add Public Wi-Fi Access
• Court improvements
• Playground equipment and surfacing updates
• Expand amenities - Pickleball
• Add sledding hill within park system
• Trail expansion
• Parking lot repairs or improvements
• Park signage updates
Hillcrest Park Larson Park
Pioneer Park Sexauer Park
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
81
SPECIAL USE PARKS
Size: Varies from 0.25 acres (Bark Park) to 150 acres (Edgebrook Golf Course) with a median size of 60 acres and an average of 56.6
acres.
Existing Special Use Parks:
Amenity
Bark Park Dog Park
Dakota Nature Park Walking, Biking, and Pond Recreation
Edgebrook Golf Course 18 Hole and 9 Hole Course
Fishback Soccer Complex 10 Full-sized Soccer Fields
Northbrook Park Community Garden Community Garden Plots and Support Amenities
Southbrook Softball Complex 5 Field Softball Complex
Evaluation & Opportunities: Opportunities for additional experiences at Neighborhood Parks may include:
• Improve or expand trails
• High demand for garden plots; consider additional location
• Add second dog park within the system
• Consider additional campground sites
Bark Park Dakota Nature Park
Southbrook Softball Complex Fishback Soccer Complex
82
4.3 LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS
4.3.1 OVERVIEW
Level of Service (LOS) standards are guidelines that define service areas based on population that support investment decisions
related to parks, facilities, and amenities. LOS standards are updated over time as industry trends and community demographics
change.
The consulting team evaluated park facility standards using a combination of resources. These resources included market trends,
demographic data, community and stakeholder input, the statistically-valid community survey, and general observations. The
existing level of service was based on analysis of Brookings park system and other service providers in the City (e.g., School District,
Boy’s and Girl’s Club, South Dakota South Dakota, South Dakota Game Fish and Parks, and the Children’s Museum). This information
allowed standards to be customized to Brookings.
It is important to note that these LOS standards should be viewed as a guide. The standards are to be coupled with conventional
wisdom and judgment related to the particular situation and needs of the community. By applying these standards to the population
of Brookings, gaps or surpluses in park and facility types are revealed.
4.3.2 PER CAPITA “GAPS”
According to the LOS, there are multiple needs to be met to properly serve the Brookings community today and in the future. The
existing level of service meets and exceeds best practices and recommended service levels for many items; however, there are
several areas that do not meet recommended standards. Although Brookings meets the standards for total park acres, there is a
small deficit for neighborhood, community, and special use, park acreage, as well total miles of trails.
For outdoor amenities, Brookings only shows a shortage a Splashpad. In terms of indoor space, Brookings has a shortage of
approximately 22,000 square feet of indoor recreation space and 12,700 of indoor aquatic space.
It should be noted, however, that other providers in Brookings, such as the School District, Boy’s and Girl’s Club, South Dakota South
Dakota, South Dakota Game Fish and Parks, and the Children’s Museum, adds to the community inventory measured in the Level of
Service. It is important for Brookings to understand its role in the LOS in relation to the other providers in order to position itself by
maintaining its importance in providing parks, open space, and trails within the local market.
The standards that follow are based upon population figures for 2020 and 2025, the latest estimates available at the time of analysis.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
83
The Level of Service Standard helps to determine community unmet needs based on the Community Survey, NRPA National Standards, best practices in the Upper Midwest area in communities of similar size and nature.
Amenities Brookings
Inventory
School
Inventory
Other
Inventory
Total
Inventory
Meet Standard/
Need Exists
Meet Standard/
Need Exists
PARK TYPE:
Mini/Pocket Parks 15.10 2.73 17.83 0.73 acres per 1,000 0.50 acres per 1,000 Meets Standard - Acre(s)Meets Standard - Acre(s)
Neighborhood Parks 32.90 32.90 1.35 acres per 1,000 1.40 acres per 1,000 Need Exists 1 Acre(s)Need Exists 3 Acre(s)
Community Parks 96.90 96.90 3.98 acres per 1,000 3.75 acres per 1,000 Meets Standard - Acre(s)Meets Standard - Acre(s)
Special Use Parks 481.25 30.00 511.25 21.01 acres per 1,000 19.25 acres per 1,000 Meets Standard - Acre(s)Meets Standard - Acre(s)
School Parks 7.26 7.26 0.30 acres per 1,000 0.29 acres per 1,000 Meets Standard - Acre(s)Meets Standard - Acre(s)
Total Developed Park Acres 626.15 7.26 32.73 666.14 27.37 acres per 1,000 25.19 acres per 1,000 Meets Standard - Acre(s)Meets Standard - Acre(s)
Undeveloped (Open Spaces)71.80 71.80 2.95 acres per 1,000 acres per 1,000 Meets Standard - Acre(s)Meets Standard - Acre(s)
Total Park Acres 697.95 7.26 32.73 737.94 30.32 acres per 1,000 25.19 acres per 1,000 Meets Standard - Acre(s)Meets Standard - Acre(s)
TRAILS:
Paved Park Trails 14.14 14.14 0.58 miles per 1,000 0.80 miles per 1,000 Need Exists 5.33 Mile(s)Need Exists 6.27 Mile(s)
Natural Park Trails 6.70 6.70 0.28 miles per 1,000 0.40 miles per 1,000 Need Exists 3.03 Mile(s)Need Exists 3.50 Mile(s)
Total Park Trail Miles 20.84 20.84 0.86 miles per 1,000 1.20 miles per 1,000 Need Exists 8.36 Mile(s)Need Exists 9.77 Mile(s)
On Street Bicycle Trail Miles 8.00 8.00 0.31 miles per 1,000 miles per 1,000 Meets Standard - Mile(s)Meets Standard - Mile(s)
OUTDOOR AMENITIES:
Small Shelters 11.00 - 11.00 1.00 site per 2,212 1.00 site per 5,000 Meets Standard - Sites(s)Meets Standard - Sites(s)
Large Shelters 8.00 - 8.00 1.00 site per 3,042 1.00 site per 5,000 Meets Standard - Sites(s)Meets Standard - Sites(s)
Youth Baseball Fields 9.00 0.99 9.99 1.00 field per 2,436 1.00 field per 5,000 Meets Standard - Field(s)Meets Standard - Field(s)
Adult Baseball Fields 1.00 0.33 1.33 1.00 field per 18,298 1.00 field per 20,000 Meets Standard - Field(s)Meets Standard - Field(s)
Softball Fields 6.00 - 6.00 1.00 field per 4,056 1.00 field per 5,000 Meets Standard - Field(s)Meets Standard - Field(s)
Rectangular Multi-Purpose Fields 20.00 0.99 20.99 1.00 field per 1,159 1.00 field per 4,000 Meets Standard - Field(s)Meets Standard - Field(s)
Basketball Courts 10.00 1.32 11.32 1.00 court per 2,150 1.00 court per 2,500 Meets Standard - Court(s)Meets Standard - Court(s)
Tennis / Pickleball Courts 12.00 - 12.00 1.00 court per 2,028 1.00 court per 2,500 Meets Standard - Court(s)Meets Standard - Court(s)
Playgrounds 14.00 0.99 1.00 15.99 1.00 site per 1,522 1.00 site per 2,500 Meets Standard - Site(s)Meets Standard - Site(s)
Sand Volleyball Courts 7.00 0.33 7.33 1.00 court per 3,320 1.00 court per 5,000 Meets Standard - Court(s)Meets Standard - Court(s)
Dog Parks 1.00 1.00 1.00 site per 24,337 1.00 site per 30,000 Meets Standard - Site(s)Meets Standard - Site(s)
Skateparks 1.00 - 1.00 1.00 site per 24,337 1.00 site per 40,000 Meets Standard - Site(s)Meets Standard - Site(s)
Splashpads - 1.00 site per - 1.00 site per 20,000 Need Exists 1 Site(s)Need Exists 1 Site(s)
Outdoor Pools 1.00 - 1.00 1.00 site per 24,337 1.00 site per 40,000 Meets Standard - Site(s)Meets Standard - Site(s)
INDOOR AMENITIES:
Indoor Recreation Space (Square Feet)18,000.00 11,000.00 29,000.00 1.19 SF per person 2.00 SF per person Need Exists 19,674 Square Feet Need Exists 22,022 Square Feet
Indoor Special Use Space (Square Feet)72,450.00 72,450.00 2.98 SF per person 2.75 SF per person Meets Standard - Square Feet Meets Standard - Square Feet
Indoor Aquatic Space (Square Feet) - - - SF per person 0.50 SF per person Need Exists 12,169 Square Feet Need Exists 12,756 Square Feet
24,337
25,511
Notes
School inventory has been reduced to a third of the total amount due to the lack of accessibility to the general public.
Other Inventory include parks owned by the State of South Dakota, South Dakota Game, Fish and Parks, Boy's and Girl's Club, and the Children's Museum of South Dakota.
On Street Bicycle Trail Miles, which includes 6 miles of streets with shared lane markings and 2 miles of streets with standard bike lanes, are not included in Total Park Trail Miles.
SDSU and the school district both operate an indoor pool, but both are nearing their lifecycle use and lack accessbility to the general public and were not included.
Current Estimated Population
5-Year Projected Population
2020 Inventory - Developed Facilities Current
Facility Standards
Five Year Projected
Facility Standards
Current Service Level based
upon population
Recommended Service Levels;
Revised for Local Service Area
Additional Facilities/
Amenities Needed
Additional Facilities/
Amenities Needed
84
Page Intentionally Left Blank
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
85
4.4 GIS MAPPING
Service area maps and standards assist Brookings in assessing where services are offered, how equitable the service distribution
and delivery is across the Brookings service area, and how effective the service is as it compares to the demographic densities. In
addition, looking at guidelines with reference to population enables Brookings to assess gaps in services, where facilities are
needed, or where an area is over saturated. This allows the Brookings city management to make appropriate capital improvement
decisions based upon need for a system as a whole and the ramifications those decisions may have on a specific area.
The maps contain several circles, which represent the recommended per capita LOS found on the previous page. The circles’ size
varies dependent upon the quantity of a given amenity (or acre type) located at one site and the surrounding population density.
The bigger the circle, the more people a given amenity or park acre serves and vice versa. Additionally, some circles are shaded a
different color which represents the “owner” of that particular amenity or acre type. There is a legend in the bottom left-hand corner
of each map depicting the various owners included in the equity mapping process. The areas of overlapping circles represent
adequate service, or duplicated service, and the areas with no shading represents the areas not served by a given amenity or park
acre type. It should be noted that Brookings has excellent coverage of parks throughout the City.
Service area maps were created for:
• All Parks Location
• Mini/Pocket, Neighborhood, Community, and Special Use Parks
• Mini/Pocket Parks
• Neighborhood Parks
• Community Parks
• Special Use Parks
• School Parks
• Undeveloped Open Space
• Adult Baseball Fields
• Basketball Courts
• Dog Parks
• Indoor Aquatics
• Indoor Recreation
• Indoor Special Use
• Large Shelters
• Natural Trails
• Outdoor Pools
• Paved Trails
• Playgrounds
• Rectangular Multi-Purpose Fields
• Sand Volleyball Courts
• Skateparks
• Small Shelters
• Splashpads
• Tennis / Pickleball Courts
• Youth Baseball Fields
86
4.4.1 SERVICE AREA MAPS
ALL PARKS LOCATION
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
87
MINI, NEIGHBORHOOD, COMMUNITY AND SPECIAL USE PARKS
88
MINI PARKS
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
89
NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS
90
COMMUNITY PARKS
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
91
SPECIAL USE PARKS
92
SCHOOL PARKS
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
93
UNDEVELOPED OPEN SPACE
94
ADULT BASEBALL FIELDS
SDSU has an adult baseball field that the University uses, but it is not included due to limited access to the public.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
95
BASKETBALL COURTS
96
DOG PARKS
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
97
INDOOR AQUATICS
Indoor aquatic facilities are available at SDSU and the School District, however, both facilities are nearing end of Lifecyle and have
limited public access.
98
INDOOR RECREATION SPACE
It should be noted that SDSU provides indoor recreation space, but not included due to limited access to the public. Also, the Fishback
Soccer Club has opened a special use/private training facility.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
99
INDOOR SPECIAL USE
Brookings County also has an Indoor Adventure Center, but not included on the map below.
100
LARGE SHELTERS
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
101
NATURAL TRAILS
102
OUTDOOR POOLS
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
103
PAVED TRAILS
104
PLAYGROUNDS
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
105
RECTANGULAR MULTI-PURPOSE FIELD
106
SAND VOLLEYBALL COURTS
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
107
SKATEPARKS
108
SMALL SHELTERS
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
109
SPLASHPADS
110
TENNIS/PICKLEBALL COURTS
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
111
YOUTH BASEBALL FIELDS
112
4.5 PROGRAM ASSESSMENT
4.5.1 INTRODUCTION
As part of Brookings’ Parks and Recreation Master Plan, the consulting team performed a Recreation Program Assessment of the
services offered by the City’s Parks, Recreation and Forestry Department (“Department”). The assessment offers an in-depth
perspective of program and service offerings and helps identify strengths, challenges, and opportunities regarding programming.
The assessment also assists in identifying core programs, program gaps within the community, key system-wide issues, areas of
improvement, and future programs and services for residents and visitors.
These program findings and comments are based from a review of information provided by the Department including program
descriptions, financial data, website content, and discussions with staff. This report addresses the program offerings from a systems
perspective for the entire portfolio of programs.
4.5.2 FRAMEWORK
The recreation goals are the Department include:
• Establishing an atmosphere at each sponsored activity, which is supportive
of the efforts of each participant and affirms their worth.
• Providing enjoyable recreational activities, which enhance the quality of
life for participants and volunteer leaders.
• Providing recreational opportunities, both competitive and non-
competitive, for persons of all ages at a reasonable expense.
In order to help achieve these goals, the Department provides a broad range of youth
and adult public recreational activities. These program offerings are supported with
dedicated spaces which include 21 parks, a soccer complex, a softball complex, a golf
course, a nature center, an outdoor aquatic center, an indoor gymnasium, and an
indoor ice rink. However, it should be noted that the Department currently does not
program most of these facilities but instead partners with independent youth sports
leagues to program these spaces.
4.5.3 PROGRAM ASSESSMENT OVERVIEW
Below are some overall observations that stood out when analyzing the program
assessment sheet:
• Overall, the program descriptions need to ensure that the key benefits
and goals of each Core Program Area are effectively communicated to the
public.
• Age segment distribution is aligned with the community’s current
population but needs to be monitored annually to ensure program
distribution continues to match Brookings’ demographics.
• Program lifecycles: Approximately 2% of the system’s current
programs are categorized in the Introduction Stage, while 2% of programs
fall into the Decline Stage. A complete description of Lifecycle Stages can
be found in Section 4.5.5.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
113
• The City’s volunteer program allows residents and organizations to easily get involved and give back to the community
through various volunteer opportunities, special events, programs, but needs to be better tracked and managed to
guarantee efficiency.
• From a marketing and promotions standpoint, the staff utilizes a variety of marketing methods when promoting their
programs including: printed and online program guides, the City’s website, flyers/brochures, direct mail, radio
advertisements, and various social media channels as a part of the marketing mix.
o The Department would benefit from identifying Return on Investment (ROI) for all marketing initiatives.
o Opportunity to increase the number of cross-promotions.
• Currently, customer feedback methods are not being utilized. Moving forward, it is highly recommended that the
Department begins incorporating user feedback as a key performance measure that can be tracked over time. Specifically,
pre-program evaluation and lost customer surveys are highly recommended feedback tools that should be considered
moving forward.
• Pricing strategies are varied across the board. Currently, the most frequently used approach is age segment pricing.
This is good practice and should be continued in addition to implementing some new pricing strategies which can be found
in Section 4.5.5.. Furthermore, it is essential to understand current cost of service in order to determine ideal cost
recovery goals.
• Financial performance measures such as cost recovery goals are currently being utilized on a Core Program Area
basis. Moving forward, it is recommended for staff to continue tracking cost recovery for all program areas. When doing
so, the staff should factor in all direct and indirect costs pertaining to programming. A focus on developing consistent
earned income opportunities would be beneficial to the Department’s overall quest for greater fiscal sustainability.
4.5.4 CORE PROGRAM AREAS
To help achieve the mission, it is important to identify Core Program Areas based on current and future needs to create a sense of
focus around specific program areas of greatest importance to the community. Public recreation is challenged by the premise of
being all things to all people. The philosophy of the Core Program Area is to assist staff, policy makers, and the public to focus on
what is most important. Program areas are considered as Core if they meet a majority of the following categories:
• The program area has been provided for a long period of time (over 4-5 years) and/or is expected by the community.
• The program area consumes a relatively large portion (5% or more) of the agency’s overall budget.
• The program area is offered 3-4 seasons per year.
• The program area has wide demographic appeal.
• There is a tiered level of skill development available within the program area’s offerings.
• There is full-time staff responsible for the program area.
• There are facilities designed specifically to support the program area.
• The agency controls a significant percentage (20% or more) of the local market.
114
Existing Core Program Areas
EXISTING CORE PROGRAM AREAS
In consultation with the Department staff, the planning team identified six Core Program Areas currently being offered.
Adult Athletics Aquatics
Community Activities
Senior Activities
Nature
Youth
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
115
CORE PROGRAM AREA DESCRIPTIONS, GOALS, & EXAMPLE PROGRAMS
Description: Leagues and programs offered for adults.
Goals: Provide the opportunity for adults to socialize while
participating in an athletic activity of their choice.
Adult Athletics •Adult Tennis Lessons
•Co-ed Volleyball
•Kickball
•Men's Basketball
•Sand Volleyball
Description: Aquatic based programming.
Goals: Provide swim lessons and other aquatic
based activities for the community’s leisure time. Aquatics •Learn to Swim
•Lifeguard Training
•Open Swim
•Water Aerobics
•Wee Waders Community Activities Description: Activities and events for all ages that help
bring the community together.
Goals: Provide activities that promote unity and
inclusion for all community residents.
•Arbor Day Run/Walk
•Community Games
•Soggy Doggy Day
•Open skate
•Summer Arts Festival
Description: Nature based programs for youth and
adults.
Goals: Introduce youth & adults to a wide area of
different nature-based programs. Nature •Creepy Crawler
Critters
•Fishin' Friday's
•I Spy Mystery
Challenge
•Nature Explorers
•Wildlife Rangers
116
CORE PROGRAM AREA RECOMMENDATIONS
These existing Core Program Areas provide a generally well-rounded and diverse array of programs for the community. Based
upon the observations of the planning team, demographic and recreation trends information, Department staff should evaluate Core
Program Areas and individual programs, ideally on an annual basis, to ensure offerings are relevant to evolving demographics and
trends in the local community. Furthermore, based on community input, residents have a need for additional nature programs as
well as more community activity offerings.
Description: Programming offered to those ages 55 and
older. •8-Ball Pool
•Dominos
•Fit & Fun Cardio
•Pinochle
•Senior Games
Goals: Provide quality opportunities for education, physical
exercise, social interaction, and mental stimulation to the
55+ population.
Senior Activities Description: Programs offered for youth. •Learn to Skate
•Kickstart Soccer
•Safety Town
•T-Ball
•Tennis Academy
Goals: Provide basic programs for youth of all skill
levels. Youth
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
117
POTENTIAL NEW CORE PROGRAM AREA RECOMMENDATIONS
The Department should explore adding additional Core Program Areas to assist in fulfilling existing unmet needs. Based on the
results from the Statistically Valid Community Survey, Brookings’ residents have a strong “Need” for Fitness Programs, specifically
adult and aquatic programs, as well as Special Events. Both program areas received a very high Priority Investment Rating (PIR)
base on resident responses as well as a strong household need rating.
118
4.5.5 PROGRAM STRATEGY ANALYSIS
AGE SEGMENT ANALYSIS
The table below depicts each Core Program Area and the most prominent age segments they serve. Recognizing that many Core
Program Areas serve multiple age segments, Primary (noted with a ‘P’) and Secondary (noted with an ‘S’) markets are identified.
Age Segment Analysis
Core Program Area Preschool
(5 & Under)
Elementary
(6-12)
Teens
(13-
17)
Adult
(18+)
Senior
(55+)
All Ages
Programs
Adult Athletic P S
Aquatic P P P S S S
Community Activities S S S S S P
Nature S S S S S P
Senior Activities P
Youth P S
For this report, an Age Segment Analysis was completed by Core Program Area,
exhibiting an over-arching view of the age segments served by different program areas,
and displaying any gaps in segments served. It is also useful to perform an Age Segment
Analysis by individual programs, in order to gain a more nuanced view of the data. Based
on the age demographics of the City, current programs seem to be well-aligned with the
community’s age profile. With roughly 50% of Brookings’s population falling between
18-34, it is fitting that the Young Adult segment is highly catered to.
That being said, the lack of primary programs dedicated to the Preschool segment is
noticeable. Moving forward, it is recommended that the Department considers
introducing new programs to address any unmet needs. With approximately one-third
of the youth population (0-17) being 0-5 years-old, offering an adequate number of
Preschool programs is important for the Departments success. Such programs as Nature
Kids or Arts & Crafts are popular programs with this age segment and were both ranked
high in terms of “need” in the Community Survey. Additionally, by offering more youth
programs, it could help incentives more young families to move to Brookings.
Staff should continue to monitor demographic shifts and program offerings to ensure that
the needs of each age group are being met. It would be best practice to establish a plan
including what age segment to target, establish the message, which marketing method(s)
to use, create the social media campaign, and determine what to measure for success
before allocating resources towards a particular effort.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
119
PROGRAM LIFECYCLE
A Program Lifecycle Analysis involves reviewing each program offered by the Department to determine the stage of growth or
decline for each. This provides a way of informing strategic decisions about the overall mix of programs managed by the agency to
ensure that an appropriate number of programs are “fresh” and that relatively few programs, if any, need to be discontinued. This
analysis is not based on strict quantitative data, but rather, is based on staff members’ knowledge of their program areas. The
following table shows the percentage distribution of the various lifecycle categories of the City’s programs. These percentages
were obtained by comparing the number of programs in each individual stage with the total number of programs listed by staff
members.
The Lifecycle Analysis depicts a slightly skewed program distribution. Approximately 35% of all programs fall within
the beginning stages (Introduction, Take-Off, & Growth); however only 2% of that is allocated between the Introduction and Take-
Off stage. With so few programs in these early stages, it suggests the Department may be lacking when it comes innovation and
creating new program opportunities for residents. It is recommended to have 50-60% of all programs within the three beginning
stages because it provides the Department an avenue to energize its programmatic offerings. Eventually, these programs will begin
to move into the Mature stage, so these stages ensure the pipeline for new programs is there. It is key to continue adding new
programs in the Introduction stage as those programs are meant to progress through the lifecycle stages.
According to staff, 59% of all program offerings fell into the Mature stage. This stage anchors a program portfolio and it is
recommended to have roughly 40% of programs within the Mature category in order to achieve a stable foundation. Additionally,
6% of programs are Saturated or Declining. It is a natural progression for programs to eventually evolve into saturation and
decline. However, if programs reach these stages rapidly, it could be an indication that the quality of the programs does not meet
expectations, or there is not as much of a demand for the programs.
As programs enter the Decline stage, they must be closely reviewed and evaluated for repositioning or elimination. When this
occurs, the Department should modify these programs to begin a new lifecycle with the Introductory stage or to add new programs
based upon community needs and trends. Staff should complete a Program Lifecycle Analysis on an annual basis and ensure that
the percentage distribution closely aligns with desired performance. Furthermore, the Department could include annual performance
measures for each Core Program Area to track participation growth, customer retention, and percentage of new programs as an
incentive for innovation and alignment with community trends.
Lifecycle Description
Actual
Programs
Distribution
Recommended
Distribution
Introduction New Programs; modest participation 2%
35% 50%-60%
Total Take-Off Rapid participation growth 0%
Growth Moderate, but consistent participation growth 33%
Mature Slow participation growth 59% 59% 40%
Saturation Minimal to no participation growth; extreme competition 4% 6% 0-10%
Total Decline Declining participation 2%
120
PROGRAM CLASSIFICATION
Conducting a classification of services analysis informs how each program serves the overall organization mission, the goals and
objectives of each Core Program Area, and how the program should be funded regarding tax dollars and/or user fees and charges.
How a program is classified can help to determine the most appropriate management, funding, and marketing strategies.
Program classifications are based on the degree to which the program provides a public benefit versus a private benefit. Public
benefit can be described as everyone receiving the same level of benefit with equal access, whereas private benefit can be described
as the user receiving exclusive benefit above what a general taxpayer receives for their personal benefit.
For this exercise, the Department used a classification method based on three categories: Essential Services, Important Services,
and Value-Added Services. Where a program or service is classified depends upon alignment with the organizational mission, how
the public perceives a program, legal mandates, financial sustainability, personal benefit, competition in the marketplace, and access
by participants. The following graphic describes each of the three program classifications.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
121
With assistance from staff, a classification of programs and services was conducted for all of the recreation programs offered by
the Department. The results presented in the following table represent the current classification of recreation program services.
Programs should be assigned cost recovery goal ranges within those overall categories. A full list organized by core area can be
found in Appendix 4.
As the Department continues to evolve to better meet the community’s needs, there could be an added benefit to managing the
services if they all were classified according to the Cost Recovery Model for Sustainable Services depicted below.
Given the broad range of cost recovery goals (i.e., 0% to 40% for Essential Services or 40% to 80% for Important Services), it would
be helpful to further distribute programs internally within sub-ranges of cost recovery as depicted in the previous Figure. This will
allow for programs to fall within an overall service classification tier while still demonstrating a difference in expected / desired
cost recovery goals based on a greater understanding of the program’s goals (e.g., Pure Community services versus Mostly
Community Services or Community and Individual Mix versus Mostly Individual Mix).
Brookings Program Classification Distribution
Essential Important Value-Added
11% 71% 18%
122
TOTAL
COSTS FOR
ACTIVITY
Personnel
Costs
Indirect
Costs
Debt
Service
Costs
Supply and
Material
Costs
Equipment
Costs
Contracted
Services
Vehicle
Costs
Building
Costs
Administrative
Cost Allocation
COST OF SERVICE & COST RECOVERY
Cost recovery targets should at least be identified for each Core Program Area, and for specific programs or events when realistic.
The previously identified Core Program Areas would serve as an effective breakdown for tracking cost recovery metrics including
administrative costs. Theoretically, staff should review how programs are grouped for similar cost recovery and subsidy goals to
determine if current practices still meet management outcomes.
Determining cost recovery performance and using it to make informed pricing decisions involves a three-step process:
1. Classify all programs and services based on the public or private benefit they provide (as completed in the previous
section).
2. Conduct a Cost of Service Analysis to calculate the full cost of each program.
3. Establish a cost recovery percentage, through Department policy, for each program or program type based on the
outcomes of the previous two steps and adjust program prices accordingly.
The following provide more detail on steps 2 & 3.
Understanding the full Cost of Service
To develop specific cost recovery targets, full cost of accounting needs to be created on each class or program that accurately
calculates direct and indirect costs. Cost recovery goals are established once these numbers are in place, and the Department’s
program staff should be trained on this process. A Cost of Service Analysis should be conducted on each program, or program type,
that accurately calculates direct (i.e., program-specific) and indirect (i.e., comprehensive, including administrative overhead) costs.
Completing a Cost of Service Analysis not only helps determine the true and full cost of offering a program, but it also provides
information that can be used to price programs based upon accurate delivery costs. Figure 8 illustrates the common types of costs
that must be accounted for in a Cost of Service Analysis.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
123
The methodology for determining the total Cost of Service involves calculating the total cost for the activity, program, or service,
then calculating the total revenue earned for that activity. Costs (and revenue) can also be derived on a per unit basis. Program or
activity units may include:
• Number of participants
• Number of tasks performed
• Number of consumable units
• Number of service calls
• Number of events
• Required time for offering program/service
Agencies use Cost of Service Analysis to determine what financial resources are required to provide specific programs at specific
levels of service. Results are used to determine and track cost recovery as well as to benchmark different programs provided by
the Department between one another. Cost recovery goals are established once Cost of Service totals have been calculated.
Program staff should be trained on the process of conducting a Cost of Service Analysis and the process should be undertaken on a
regular basis.
Current Cost Recovery
The Department currently tracks cost recovery on a Core Program Area level. The table below highlights current cost recovery goals
as well as actual cost recovery for the last fiscal year (2020). In analyzing the table below, the Department is either meeting or
exceeding all their cost recovery targets. Adult Athletics and Nature Programs standout for having the greatest cost recovery at
300% and 285% respectively. It is recommended that the Department continue tracking and setting cost recovery goals for each
Core Program Area and for specific programs or events where practical.
Cost Recovery Goal by Core Program Area
Core
Program
Area
Current Cost
Recovery
(Direct Costs)
Actual Cost
Recovery
(2020)
Core
Program
Area
Current Cost
Recovery
(Direct Costs)
Actual Cost
Recovery
(2020)
Adult Athletic 100% 300% Nature 100% 285%
Aquatic 100% 120% Senior
Activities 0% 0%
Community
Activities 0% 0% Youth 100% 115%
124
Cost Recovery Best Practices
Cost recovery targets should reflect the degree to which a program provides a public versus individual good. Programs providing
public benefits (i.e., Essential programs) should be subsidized more by the Department; programs providing individual benefits (i.e.,
Value-Added programs) should seek to recover costs and/or generate revenue for other services. To help plan and implement cost
recovery policies, the consulting team has developed the following definitions to help classify specific programs within program
areas.
• Essential Programs-category are critical to achieving the organizational mission and providing community-wide benefits
and therefore, generally receive priority for tax-dollar subsidization.
• Important or Value-Added program classifications generally represent programs that receive lower priority for
subsidization.
o Important programs contribute to the organizational mission but are not essential to it; therefore, cost recovery
for these programs should be high (i.e., at least 80% overall).
o Value-Added programs are not critical to the mission and should be prevented from drawing upon limited public
funding, so overall cost recovery for these programs should be near or in excess of 100%.
PRICING
Pricing strategies are one mechanism agencies can use to influence cost recovery. Overall, the degree to which the Department
uses various pricing strategies is rather limited. Pricing tactics are concentrated in age segment pricing however, some core areas
also use group discounts and customer’s ability to pay.
Currently, no Core Program Area utilizes more than one pricing strategy. Moving forward, it is strongly recommended that the
Department begin incorporating additional pricing tactics when deemed appropriate. Residency rates, weekday/weekend rates,
prime/non-prime time rates, cost recovery goals, market rates, and by location pricing are all valuable tools and should be
considered when setting prices. These untapped pricing strategies are useful to help stabilize usage patterns and help with cost
recovery for higher quality amenities and services. The consulting team recommends that all Core Program Areas utilize cost
recovery as a major factor in determining pricing and look at underutilized pricing strategies to bolster participation and revenue.
Staff should continue to monitor the effectiveness of the various pricing strategies they employ and adjust as necessary. It is also
important to continue monitoring for yearly competitor and other service providers (i.e., similar providers) as found in Appendix
4. The table below details pricing methods currently in place by each Core Program Area and additional areas for strategies to
implement over time.
Pricing Strategies
Core Program Area Age Segment Family/ Household Residency Weekday/ Weekend Prime / Non-Prime Time Group Discounts By Location By Competition (Market Rate) By Cost Recovery Goals By Customer's Ability to Pay Adult Athletic X
Aquatic X
Community Activities X
Nature X
Senior Activities X
Youth X
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
125
PROGRAM STRATEGY RECOMMENDATIONS
In general, the Department program staff should continue the cycle of evaluating programs on both individual merit as well as the
program mix as a whole. This can be completed at one time on an annual basis, or in batches at key seasonal points of the year, as
long as each program is checked once per year. The following tools and strategies can help facilitate this evaluation process:
Mini Business Plans
It is recommended that Mini Business Plans (2-3 pages) for each Core Program Area be updated on a yearly basis. These plans
should evaluate the Core Program Area based on meeting the outcomes desired for participants, cost recovery, percentage of the
market and business controls, cost of service, pricing strategy for the next year, and marketing strategies that are to be
implemented. If developed regularly and consistently, they can be effective tools for budget construction and justification processes
in addition to marketing and communication tools.
Program Development & Decision-Making Matrix
When developing program plans and strategies, it is useful to consider all of the Core Program Areas and individual program analysis
discussed in this Program Assessment. Lifecycle, Age Segment, Classification, and Cost Recovery Goals should all be tracked, and
this information, along with the latest demographic trends and community input, should be factors that lead to program decision-
making. Community input can help staff focus in on specific program areas to develop new opportunities in what group of citizens
to target including the best marketing methods to use.
A simple, easy-to-use tool similar to the table below will help compare programs and prioritize resources using multiple data points,
rather than relying solely on cost recovery. In addition, this analysis will help staff make an informed, objective case to the public
when a program in decline, but beloved by a few, is retired. If the program/service is determined to have strong priority,
appropriate cost recovery, good age segment appeal, good partnership potential, and strong market conditions the next step is to
determine the marketing methods by completing a similar exercise as the one seen below.
Program Idea (Name or Concept):
Marketing Methods Content
Developed
Contact
Information Start Date
Activity Guide
Website
Newspaper Article
Radio
Social Media
Flyers - Public Places
Newspaper Ad
Email Notification
Event Website
School Flyer/Newsletter
Television
Digital Sign
Friends & Neighbors Groups
Staff Promotion @ Events
Marketing & Promotion Methods
Internal Factors
Priority Ranking:High Medium Low
Program Area:Core Non-core
Classification Essential Important Discretionary
Cost Recovery Range 0-40% 60-80% 80+%
Age Segment Primary Secondary
Sponsorship/Partnership
Potential Partnerships Monetary Volunteers Partner Skill Location/Space
Potential Sponsors Monetary Volunteers Sponsor Skill Location/Space
Market Competition
Number of Competitors
Competitiveness High Medium Low
Growth Potential High Low
126
Program Evaluation Cycle (with Lifecycle Stages)
Using the Age Segment and Lifecycle analysis, and other established criteria, program staff should evaluate programs on an annual
basis to determine program mix. This can be incorporated into the Program Operating/Business Plan process. A diagram of the
program evaluation cycle and program lifecycle is found in the table below. During the Introductory Stages, program staff should
establish program goals, design program scenarios and components, and develop the program operating/business plan. Regular
program evaluations will help determine the future of a program.
If participation levels are still growing, continue to provide the program. When participation growth is slowing (or non-existent) or
competition increases, staff should look at modifying the program to re-energize the customers to participate. When program
participation is consistently declining, staff should terminate the program and replace it with a new program based on the public’s
priority ranking and/or in activity areas that are trending nationally/regionally/locally, while taking into consideration the
anticipated local participation percentage.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
127
4.5.6 MARKETING, VOLUNTEERS, AND PARTNERSHIPS
CURRENT RECREATION MARKETING AND COMMUNICATIONS
The Department’s current marketing plan utilizes several communication methods to connect with residents including printed and
online program guides, the City’s website, flyers/brochures, direct mail, radio advertisements, and various social media channels.
Effective communication strategies require striking an appropriate balance between the content with the volume of messaging while
utilizing the “right” methods of delivery. The Department has a broad distribution of delivery methods for promoting programs. It
is imperative to continue updating the marketing plan annually to provide information for community needs, demographics, and
recreation trends.
An effective marketing plan must build upon and integrate with supporting plans and directly coordinate with organization priorities.
The plan should also provide specific guidance as to how the Department’s identity and brand is to be consistently portrayed across
the multiple methods and deliverables used for communication.
128
WEBSITE
The Department’s website (https://cityofbrookings-sd.gov/204/Parks-Recreation-Forestry) has several features making it easy to
navigate and user friendly. There is a navigation bar located along the left side of the homepage as well as a “Quick Link” section
located in the bottom righthand corner, both assist users in finding specific information on secondary pages. Further down the
homepage users will find “Social Media” which has links to all of the City’s social media pages including, Facebook, Instagram,
Twitter, and YouTube. Making is easy for resident to follow/subscribe to the City’s varies platform in order to better stay connected
on what is happening in the community.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
129
SOCIAL MEDIA
The City of Brookings utilizes Web 2.0 technology through Facebook, Instagram,
Twitter, and YouTube. The key to successful implementation of a social network
is to move the participants from awareness to action and creating greater user
engagement. This could be done by:
• Allowing controlled ‘user generated content’ by encouraging users to
send in their pictures from the City’s special events or programs.
• Introducing Facebook-only promotions to drive greater visitation to Facebook.
• Leverage the website to obtain customer feedback for programs, parks and facilities and customer service.
• Maximize the website’s revenue generating capabilities.
• Conduct annual website strategy workshop with the staff to identify ways and means that the website can support the
City’s Social Media Trends.
Social Media Users
Over the last decade, social media has become one of the Country’s fastest growing trends. With only ten percent of the country
using social media in 2008; today, an estimated seventy-nine percent of the U.S. population is currently using some form of social
media. With such a large percentage of the population using these online media platforms in their daily lives, it becomes essential
for the City to take advantage of these marketing opportunities. Social media can be a useful and affordable tool to reach current
and potentially new system users. Such platforms as Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, Pinterest, Twitter, or LinkedIn are extremely
popular with not only today’s youth but also young and middle-aged adults.
Source: https://www.statista.com/statistics/273476/percentage-of-us-population-with-a-social-network-
profile/
10%
21%
44%
53%57%63%66%70%
77%80%77%79%
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Precentage of U.S. PopulationPrecentage of U.S. Population Who Currently Use
Any Social Media
130
Social Media Platforms
Below is a chart that depicts the most frequently used social media sites throughout the world. As of August 2019, Facebook stands
out as the most heavily trafficked social media platform, with an estimated 2.2 billion visitors per month. YouTube is second with
1.9 billion visitors per month.
Mediums Used to Access the Internet
The neighboring image is taken directly from Statista.com and depicts the number of
internet users in the United States, number of available Wi-Fi locations, and internet
penetration in the US. Only 10% of surveyed adults state they do not use the internet in
2019. As of 2018 Statista, the United States has the largest online market in the world
with 312 million users.
MARKETING AND COMMUNICATIONS RECOMMENDATIONS
• Ensure the marketing plan includes the components and strategies identified in this section.
• Establish priority segments to target in terms of new program/service development and communication tactics.
• Establish and review regularly performance measures for marketing; performance measures can be tracked through
customer surveys as well as some web-based metrics.
• Leverage relationships with partners to enhance marketing efforts through cross-promotion that include defined
measurable outcomes.
Source: www.dreamgrow.com/top-15-most-popular-social-networking-sites/
Source: www.statista.com/topics/2237/internet-
usage-in-the-united-states/
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
131
4.5.7 VOLUNTEER AND PARTNERSHIP MANAGEMENT
Today’s realities require most public recreation and parks departments to seek productive and meaningful partnerships with both
community organizations and individuals to deliver quality and seamless services to their residents. These relationships should be
mutually beneficial to each party to better meet overall community needs and expand the positive impact of the agency’s mission.
Effective partnerships and meaningful volunteerism are key strategy areas for the City to meet the needs of the community in the
years to come.
CURRENT VOLUNTEER MANAGEMENT
When managed with respect and used strategically, volunteers can serve as
the primary advocates for the City and its offerings. Currently, Brookings has
volunteer opportunities posted on the City’s website, underneath the “Quick
Links” section. Additionally, volunteer applications for those who are wanting
to get involved are also available online (https://cityofbrookings-
sd.gov/578/Volunteer-Opportunities).
Management of volunteers is currently limited primarily due to staffing restrains. However, it is recommended that the Department
begin tracking volunteers on an annual basis. Key performance indicators such as number of volunteers, volunteer hours, type of
volunteers (E.g., community service, special event, intern, etc.) should be tracked. Tracking volunteer hours can be used in budget
discussions showing how well the Department is able to leverage limited resources. A complete list of volunteer recommendations
and best practices can be found in Appendix 4.
132
RECREATION PROGRAM PARTNERSHIPS
The Department currently works with several different types of
partners throughout the community. These partnerships support
facilitation of programs and sponsorships of community events. As
with tracking of volunteer hours, tracking partnerships helps show
leadership how well staff can leverage resources. In many
instances, partnerships are inequitable to the public agency and do
not produce reasonable shared benefits between parties. It is not
suggested that the Department’s existing partnerships are
inequitable; rather, in general many park and recreation agencies’
partnerships tend to be inequitable.
The following recommended policies will promote fairness and
equity within the existing and future partnerships while helping staff
to manage against potential internal and external conflicts. Certain partnership principles must be adopted by the Department for
existing and future partnerships to work effectively. These partnership principles are as follows:
• All partnerships require a working agreement with measurable outcomes and will be evaluated on a regular basis. This
should include reports to the agency on the performance and outcomes of the partnership including an annual review to
determine renewal potential.
• All partnerships should track costs associated with the partnership investment to demonstrate the shared level of equity.
• All partnerships should maintain a culture that focuses on collaborative planning on a regular basis, regular
communications, and annual reporting on performance and outcomes to determine renewal potential and opportunities to
strengthen the partnership.
Additional partnerships can be pursued and developed with other public entities such as neighboring towns/cities, colleges, state or
federal agencies, non-for-profit organizations, as well as with private or for-profit organizations. There are recommended standard
policies and practices that will apply to any partnership, and those that are unique to relationships with private, for-profit entities.
VOLUNTEER AND PARTNERSHIP RECOMMENDATIONS
The planning team recommends the following regarding volunteers and partnerships:
Establish formal Volunteer and Partnership Policies and Agreements
Following the best practice listed in the previous section as well as in Appendix 4, continue to monitor and update established
volunteer and partner policies and agreements which are tailored to the different types of volunteers and partnerships the
Department encounters. Additionally, begin tracking volunteer metrics which include individual volunteers used annually and
volunteer hours donated annually. Lastly, begin requiring written agreements for all partnerships and identify specific measurable
outcomes for each partnership.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
133
4.6 FACILITY / AMENITY PRIORITY RANKINGS
The purpose of the Facility/Amenity and Program Priority Rankings is to provide a prioritized list of facility/amenity and program
needs for the community served by the Brookings Parks, Recreation & Forestry Department. Quantitative data was used from the
statistically-valid community survey, which asked residents to list unmet needs and rank their importance. A weighted scoring
system is used to determine the priorities for Brookings’s facilities/amenities and programs:
Data Source Component Weighting
Quantitative Data Unmet Needs Reported by the Community Survey – This is used as a factor
from the total number of households stating whether they have a need for a
facility/amenity and the extent to which their need for facilities/amenities has been
met. Survey participants were asked to identify this for 32 different
facilities/amenities and 26 program areas.
50%
Importance Rankings Reported by the Community Survey – This is used as
a factor from the importance allocated to a facility/amenity by the community. Each
respondent was asked to identify the top four most important 32 facilities/amenities
and 26 program areas.
50%
134
4.6.1 FACILITY PRIORITY RANKINGS
The following “heat map” depicts facility/amenity priority overall for the 32 facility/amenities.
Walking/hiking trails 1
Indoor swimming pools/leisure pool 2
Indoor running/walking track 3
Paved bike trails 4
Natural areas & wildlife habitats 5
Small neighborhood parks 6
Sledding hill 7
Indoor fitness & exercise facilities 8
Large community parks 9
Indoor basketball/volleyball/pickleball courts 10
Outdoor swimming pools/splash pads 11
Indoor playground 12
Camping 13
Picnic areas & shelters 14
Off-leash dog parks 15
Golf courses 16
Indoor field house sports fields 17
Community gardens 18
Multipurpose fields for practice & open play 19
Playground equipment 20
Outdoor ice-skating rinks 21
Pickleball courts 22
Mountain biking/single track 23
Youth baseball & softball fields 24
Outdoor basketball courts 25
Disc golf courses 26
Outdoor tennis courts 27
Youth football fields 28
Youth soccer fields 29
Skate parks 30
Adult softball fields 31
Adult soccer fields 32
Facilities
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
135
4.6.2 PROGRAM PRIORITY RANKINGS
The following “heat map” depicts program priority overall for the 26 programs.
Adult fitness & wellness programs 1
Nature programs 2
Water fitness programs 3
Special events 4
Travel & tourism (day trips)5
Youth & adult arts & crafts programs 6
Youth Learn to Swim programs 7
Canoeing & kayaking 8
Active senior programs 9
Senior programs 10
Outdoor adventure (camping, backpacking, etc.)11
Youth sports programs 12
Youth summer camp programs 13
Golf programs 14
Fishing programs 15
Youth fitness & wellness programs 16
Teens/tweens programs 17
Before & after school programs 18
Virtual/distance/online programs 19
Youth & adult drama/performing arts programs 20
Inclusion services/therapeutic recreation 21
Pre-school programs 22
Tennis lessons & leagues 23
eSport gaming programs 24
Martial arts programs 25
Youth gymnastics & cheerleading 26
Programs
136
4.7 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
Based on the findings of the Park and Facility Assessment, estimates for probable costs for Park improvements were developed for
inclusion in the Parks Department 5-year and 10-year Capital Improvement Plan. Costs developed are based on local and regional
historical cost data. A full 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan is located in Appendix 5.
Improvements were organized into a three-tier plan, identifying improvements as one of the following categories:
4.7.1 CRITICAL/SUSTAINABLE ALTERNATIVE
Prioritized spending within existing budget targets and focuses on deferred maintenance and lifecycle replacement of assets and
amenities within the existing parks system. The intention of the alternative is to refocus and make the most of existing resources
with the primary goal being for the City to maintain high quality services.
REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS ADDED TO THE CIP
• Arrowhead Park – Pond Renovations
• Dakota Nature Park – Trail Repairs
• Lions Park – Playground Equipment Replacement
• Sexauer Park – Sand Volleyball Edge Improvements
4.7.2 EXPANDED SERVICES ALTERNATIVE
Extra services or capital improvement that should be undertaken when additional funding is available. This includes strategically
enhancing and renovating existing parks and facilities to better meet the park and recreational needs of residents that would require
additional operational or capital funding.
REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS ADDED TO THE CIP
• Moriarty Park – North End Trail Loop Connection
• Dakota Nature Park – Parking Expansion
• Fishback Soccer Complex – Add Internal Trails
• Fishback Soccer Complex – Add Playground
4.7.3 VISIONARY ALTERNATIVE
Represents the complete set of services and facilities desired by the community. It is fiscally unconstrained but can help provide
policy guidance by illustrating the ultimate goals of the parks and recreation system and by providing a long-range look to address
future needs and deficiencies.
Visionary Alternatives address complete renovations of aging parks and facilities and the development of new parks and facilities.
Funding for visionary projects would be derived from partnerships, private investments, and new tax dollars.
REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS ADDED TO THE CIP
• New Indoor Community/Recreation Center
• New Sledding Hill
• New Miracle Field
• New Ballfields (4)
4.7.4 SUMMARY
The proposed additions to the 5- and 10-year CIP that were identified through the Park and Facility Assessment include
approximately 48 new improvements across the Park and Recreation System, totaling approximately $2.5 million in new
Critical/Sustainable Improvements, $850,000 in new Expanded Services, and $34.8 million in potential Visionary Investments.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
137
CHAPTER FIVE – OPERATIONAL REVIEW AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
5.1 OPERATIONAL REVIEW
In May of 2021, meetings were held with the Parks and Forestry Department staff through an evaluation of existing parks and
recreation sites, discussions with the maintenance staff responsible for the parks and recreation facilities, as well as an assessment
of data provided by the Division. Additionally, all of the Department’s current partnership agreements were reviewed and this
analysis can be found in Appendix 4.
5.1.1 ATHLETIC FIELDS
The division is in charge of Athletic Fields and includes the management and maintenance of a ten-(10) field Fishback Soccer Complex,
a five (5) field Southbrook Softball Complex, a renovated Bob Sheldon Competition ballfield, as well as numerous smaller game and
practice fields. All the competitive sports fields are maintained at a Level One or Level Two maintenance standard, which is the
highest level of care for sports fields, which is exceptional for a division of its staffing level. Soccer fields are mowed three times
per week, and the baseball and softball fields are mowed two times per week. The smaller baseball/softball fields do not receive
the same level of care as the stand-alone facilities, which is normal industry practices.
The competitive sports fields host many tournaments for in-city play, as well as travel teams who visit Brookings for the sports
tournaments, specifically in soccer and baseball. These travel teams provide an economic boost to the local economy with hotel
stays and food and beverage sales taxes from the players and their families who stay in Brookings. The level of maintenance
efforts the Division provides these fields should continue as Brookings residents benefit from the great sports facilities available,
and the City from the economic impact.
5.1.2 LARSON ICE CENTER
Larson Ice Center, a two (2) rink facility, is open between October through April each year and serves Brookings residents. One rink
is open in July. The parks and recreation maintenance staff clean the facility during the week and weekends. There is only one
employee who maintains the ice center during the season. The biggest complaint the City receives is on the condition of the ice as
being too hard or too soft. In the future, the City will need to replace the dehumidification system at Larson Ice Center.
5.1.3 PARK MAINTENANCE
The Parks maintenance division consists of three (3) working supervisors and five (5) park technicians that each have two (2) seasonal
staff that support them in the field. The staff work on a rotation basis, but work together on larger projects, while maintaining a
total of approximately 627 developed-acres. These crews also maintain the downtown library, police/fire stations and the downtown
landscape areas. Most of the maintenance standards in downtown Brookings are maintained at a Level One maintenance standard
during the spring and summer, which is an appropriate level. Hillcrest Park, Larson Park, and Pioneer Park are maintained at the
highest level in the City due to the Arts Festival and the numerous amenities and activities held in these three parks.
The staff indicate that the City is good at providing the necessary equipment to complete their work, and they also have the ability
to contract for specialty equipment as needed. The Division has a mechanic on staff that cares for the equipment, but they will
contract elements of service on equipment when needed. Staff contract out irrigation work, which is difficult to maintain themselves
during peak summer season.
Currently, maintenance staff complete approximately 28-30 mow-cycles annually, which is appropriate for the parks maintained
and is industry standard. The level of care is appreciated by the community as evident in the high marks from the statistically valid
survey. Ninety-two percent (92%) of residents rate the quality of parks they have visited as “Excellent” or “Good,” which is higher
than the national average of eighty-four percent (84%).
Funding for the care of the downtown streetscape that includes hanging baskets, flower beds, and street trees is funded through
the City’s General Fund. The City should consider establishing a Business Improvement District that can help support the funding for
these higher level of maintenance areas due to the business benefit from the maintenance quality of downtown through the elevated
landscape care that is provided by the City park and maintenance staff.
138
5.1.4 FORESTRY
The Forestry Division maintains approximately 10,000 street trees and 5,000 to 6,000 park trees throughout the city. The Forestry
Division currently includes four (4) staff positions. The City of Brookings is designated a Tree City USA.
The Forestry Division has established a 7–10-year pruning schedule, which is a good standard to follow and mirrors best practices
for street trees. This pruning schedule also aligns with the Street Department on when they are performing maintenance.
Currently, staff do not track the cost plant a street tree or the cost to maintain a tree each year. The biggest issue facing the Forestry
Division is the emergence of the Emerald Ash Borer, which has not yet been found in Brookings County. The City has approximately
3,000 to 4,000 ash trees in their inventory now. The City has been planting 300 trees annually to try to overcome the potential loss.
The City does have a tree nursery, but it is not very large. Forestry crew priorities are street trees followed by park trees. The
City does not receive any wheel tax money to support street trees, which many cities use these dollars to help maintain street trees
and boulevards along with parking lots as part of the wheel tax funds.
Presently, developers are not required to plant street trees as part of their development. The City does not have a Tree Commission
to help bring awareness and support for trees in Brookings.
5.1.5 OPERATIONAL ISSUES
The maintenance shop that the Division utilizes does not have adequate covered space to store equipment during the winter, which
reduces the life of equipment and should be addressed to increase the lifecycle of equipment. Presently, staff do not track the
lifecycle of equipment or the lifecycle of park amenities to budget for replacement.
Seasonal maintenance staff have been difficult to retain due to low starting hourly pay at $10.25/hour with a cap of $15/hour. The
City does escalate the hourly payment each year, but it is low and not competitive. Current practice is that Supervisors train seasonal
and part-time staff. Returning employees are worth the investment of paying a higher rate due to the learning curve and they
usually do not resign after two weeks. Presently, current staffing levels do not allow enough time to do preventative maintenance
on natural areas.
The Division does not utilize a volunteer program to assist in maintaining areas of the system, which could be beneficial in regards
to the downtown plantings and other high-profile areas. Volunteer sources that could be tapped are SDSU fraternities and sororities,
Teen Challenge of the Dakotas, and seniors.
The Division does maintain storm water at detention ponds and saw storm water funds increase for from $15,000 to $30,000 last
year. Parks and Forestry staff support Public Works during snow events in helping to clean streets, parking lots, sidewalks and
trails across the City.
5.1.6 RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Consider the development of a Business Improvement District downtown to help support the cost to provide downtown
beautification.
2. Consider having other City departments contract for maintenance around their buildings versus the expectation that the parks
department will cover these costs.
3. Developers should pay for installation of trees along streets and within their developments.
4. Create a Tree Commission or Parks Foundation to advocate for policies that support funding their own tree program and
replacement schedules.
5. Work with South Dakota State University Forestry School to help staff on a native plantings program and on special forestry
projects using students.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
139
6. Consider purchasing a maintenance management software (for parks and recreation, not public works) to track lifecycle
replacement schedules of equipment, asset lifecycle of amenities, cost of service for maintenance standards, and forestry
inventory.
7. Raise the part-time pay for park maintenance staff to a competitive level to reduce employee turnover.
8. Create a volunteer program for park maintenance, especially for downtown plantings and other high-profile areas. This would
require hiring a volunteer coordinator that is a volunteer to help with coordination.
9. Establish a Teen Challenge of the Dakotas Program for the parks and recreation department.
10. Track the asset value of the park system and try to budget for 3%-5% of total asset value to take care of what the city
already owns each year.
11. Continue to transfer maintained parkland to natural areas to cut down on mowing costs.
12. Replace the dehumidification system unit at Larson Ice Center to improve ice quality.
13. Increase maintenance staff where appropriate. Staffing levels are below the benchmark average for the population served,
and the number of park acres maintained is higher than most cities of similar population. A recent staffing study completed
in December 2020 showed that the City maintains more park acreage than average and had the lowest staff per acre.
140
5.2 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
This section of the report presents the financial assessment of the Parks, Recreation & Forestry Department of the City of Brookings,
SD, as a part of the master plan process. As a key element of the Plan, PROS Consulting reviewed available information to assess
the financial situation of the Department. The revenues, expenditures and capital funds were analyzed to identify trends and assess
the Department's financial integrity. The cost recovery for facilities, programs and services at major functional levels has been
analyzed to assess the cost-of-service recovery.
The Covid-19 epidemic is a significant negative impact of most of the nation’s park and recreation operations for the 2020 year and
may continue in 2021. The 2020 results are included in the analysis but should be viewed considering the pandemic.
The PROS Team reviewed the detailed cost and activity information prepared by the Department staff. Following is a list of the cost
and activity data reviewed:
• Actual Revenue and Expenditure Summary Reports for 2016 through 2020
• Budget Book for 2021
• Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for 2019
• Capital Improvements Plan, 2021
• Staffing Level Data Collection prepared by Public Sector Personnel Consultants, 2020
5.2.1 FINANCIAL STRENGTH
The revenues and expenditures without Golf Transfers for fiscal years ending 2016 through 2021 are shown in Figure 22.
The cost recovery is between 22.26% and 29.00% for the actual years in study period. The budgeted cost recovery for 2021 is
25.03%. The cost recovery has decreased over the analysis period.
The revenues and expenditures with Golf Transfers for fiscal years ending 2016 through 2021 are shown in Figure 23.
The cost recovery with Golf Transfers is between 27.18% and 33.01% for the actual years in study period. The budgeted cost
recovery for 2021 is 31.93%.
Best practice cost recovery for park and recreation programs is between 40% to 60%. The actual recovery for Brookings Parks,
Recreation & Forestry is less than anticipated. Most parks and recreation agencies are mandated to have a certain cost recovery to
balance the funding sources to their specific level of financial sustainability. These are based on the needs of a community and the
revenue capabilities of designed facilities. The Department needs financial policies and cost recovery goals at the program level.
The Department is mostly a facility provider for youth and adult athletics. The Department does not offer youth baseball, youth
football, youth basketball, Adult’s softball, etc. but provides the facilities for these sports. This influences the Department’s ability
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget
Revenues $979,874.57 $1,098,283.65 $1,020,256.95 $1,016,091.28 $695,245.08 $985,638.00
Expenditures $3,993,940.05 $3,787,301.45 $4,202,550.16 $3,954,553.45 $3,122,705.81 $3,938,209.00
Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures ($3,014,065.48) ($2,689,017.80) ($3,182,293.21) ($2,938,462.17) ($2,427,460.73) ($2,952,571.00)
Cost Recovery 24.53% 29.00% 24.28% 25.69% 22.26% 25.03%
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget
Revenues and Transfers $1,085,519.57 $1,098,283.65 $1,306,127.06 $1,305,341.28 $874,095.08 $1,257,515.00
Expenditures and Transfers $3,993,940.05 $3,787,301.45 $4,202,550.16 $3,954,553.45 $3,123,673.09 $3,938,209.00
Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures ($2,908,420.48) ($2,689,017.80) ($2,896,423.10) ($2,649,212.17) ($2,249,578.01) ($2,680,694.00)
Cost Recovery 27.18% 29.00% 31.08% 33.01% 27.98% 31.93%
Figure 22 - Revenues, Expenditures and Cost Recovery
Figure 23 - Revenues, Expenditures and Cost Recovery including Golf Transfers
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
141
to recover costs as the City was not focused on revenue generation in earlier years of developing the park system. The functional
Divisions are analyzed in the following sections.
5.2.2 PARKS
The Parks revenues and expenditures for fiscal years ending 2016 through 2021 are shown in Figure 24.
Parks and Nature Park operations are combined beginning with the 2021 fiscal year. For this analysis, the Parks and Nature Park
financial information has been combined for all years of the analysis.
Parks and Playgrounds cost recovery is 4.96% to 10.54% during the study period. Parks are anticipated to have low-cost recovery.
Revenues from program fees and revenues decreased by 5% over the analysis period. Between 2016 and 2019, Capital
expenditures decreased by 56.75%. The Capital expenditures decreased by 91% through projected 2021.
The average expenditure per acre is shown in Figure 25, which is based on the number of parks and miles of trails the Department
maintains. The average cost per acre has decreased over the study period.
5.2.3 AQUATICS
The Aquatics revenues and expenditures for fiscal years ending 2016 through 2021 are shown in Figure 26.
The Covid-19 epidemic eliminated most of the nation’s aquatics operations for the 2020 year. The 2020 results are included in the
analysis but should be viewed considering the epidemic. The cost recovery is between 39.17% and 52.59% for the years excluding
2020. The 2020 results were 23.10% cost recovery. Best practice cost recovery for aquatics activities is approximately 40%. The
historic cost recovery for aquatics is less than other agencies. The cost recovery for projected 2021 is 52.29%. Good cost recovery
supports facility maintenance and allows for quality programming to be provided. Cost recovery for aquatics programs is generally
40% to 80%, while cost recovery for water parks is usually 100% or more.
As industry mandates and expenses increase due to consumables and repair and maintenance, the Department should recommend
amending fees to achieve cost recovery goals as needed.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget
Revenues $96,814.14 $90,014.86 $199,180.81 $92,306.03 $76,250.00 $91,933.56
Expenditures $1,951,604.16 $1,537,431.01 $1,889,699.16 $1,745,531.07 $1,575,135.00 $1,439,355.78Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures ($1,854,790.02) ($1,447,416.15) ($1,690,518.35) ($1,653,225.04) ($1,498,885.00) ($1,347,422.22)
Cost Recovery 4.96% 5.85% 10.54% 5.29% 4.84% 6.39%
Figure 24 - Parks Revenues, Expenditures and Cost Recovery
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget
Expenditures $1,951,604.16 $1,537,431.01 $1,889,699.16 $1,745,531.07 $1,575,135.00 $1,439,355.78Park Acres Maintained 665.55 662.17 662.17 662.17 662.17 662.17
Average Cost per Acre $2,932.32 $2,321.81 $2,853.80 $2,636.08 $2,378.75 $2,173.70
Figure 25 - Average Expenditure per Acre
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget
Revenues $188,660.86 $176,106.14 $185,449.74 $155,431.15 $7,561.12 $184,000.00
Expenditures $358,736.67 $429,008.07 $355,727.58 $396,811.28 $32,725.88 $351,861.00Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures ($170,075.81) ($252,901.93) ($170,277.84) ($241,380.13) ($25,164.76) ($167,861.00)
Cost Recovery 52.59% 41.05% 52.13% 39.17% 23.10% 52.29%
Figure 26 – Aquatics Revenues, Expenditures and Cost Recovery
142
5.2.4 RECREATION
The Recreation program revenues and expenditures for fiscal years ending 2016 through 2021 are shown in Figure 27.
The Covid-19 epidemic eliminated most of the nation’s recreation programs for the 2020 year. The 2020 results are included in the
analysis but should be viewed considering the epidemic. The cost recovery is between 23.87% and 41.77% for the years excluding
2020. The 2020 results were 6.94% cost recovery. PROS anticipates cost recovery for recreation activities between 40% to 100%.
The cost recovery for the Recreation programs is less than anticipated but is projected to increase in 2021.
5.2.5 LARSON ICE ARENA
The Larson Ice Arena revenues and expenditures for fiscal years ending 2016 through 2020 are shown in Figure 28.
The cost recovery is between 24.76% and 44.27% for the study period. Best practice cost recovery for Ice facilities is usually
between 40% to 80%. The cost recovery for the Arena is less than similar agencies. Revenues decreased by 19.33% and
expenditures increased by 19.58% over the study period. The facility would benefit from a business plan to create a stronger level
of cost recovery.
5.2.6 FORESTRY
The Forestry revenues and expenditures for fiscal years ending 2016 through 2021 are shown in Figure 29.
Forestry operations are not anticipated to recover costs of operations. The Forestry cost recovery is 0.66% to 4.06% over the study
period. Forestry operations are not anticipated to generate revenues.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget
Revenues $122,753.99 $102,554.28 $95,356.04 $98,911.42 $22,096.40 $112,100.00
Expenditures $293,870.65 $300,118.90 $299,764.52 $297,682.86 $318,236.94 $469,721.00
Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures ($171,116.66) ($197,564.62) ($204,408.48) ($198,771.44) ($296,140.54) ($357,621.00)
Cost Recovery 41.77% 34.17% 31.81% 33.23% 6.94% 23.87%
Figure 27 - Recreation Revenues, Expenditures and Cost Recovery
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget
Revenues $154,331.91 $161,144.45 $144,485.15 $131,638.10 $153,563.22 $124,500.00
Expenditures $375,981.88 $485,244.01 $583,460.09 $397,409.04 $346,903.57 $449,608.00Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures ($221,649.97) ($324,099.56) ($438,974.94) ($265,770.94) ($193,340.35) ($325,108.00)
Cost Recovery 41.05% 33.21% 24.76% 33.12% 44.27% 27.69%
Figure 28 - Larson Ice Arena Revenues, Expenditures and Cost Recovery
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget
Revenues $19,710.67 $12,063.92 $3,692.00 $14,614.58 $4,343.31 $5,000.00
Expenditures $485,028.69 $560,858.46 $558,918.77 $524,708.20 $352,196.92 $409,893.00Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures ($465,318.02) ($548,794.54) ($555,226.77) ($510,093.62) ($347,853.61) ($404,893.00)
Cost Recovery 4.06% 2.15% 0.66% 2.79% 1.23% 1.22%
Figure 29 - Forestry Revenues, Expenditures and Cost Recovery
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
143
5.2.7 GOLF
Golf revenues and expenditures for fiscal years ending 2016 through 2021 are shown in Figure 30. The Golf cost recovery before
Transfer is between 75.20% and 84.18% over the study period. Similar, Golf operations recover approximately 100% of the
operations and maintenance costs. The Golf expenditures increased by 47.95% and the revenues increased by 21.68% over analysis
period. The analysis shows improved revenue generation is needed. Golf operations are impacted by decreased in the rounds of
Golf shown in Figure 32.
Golf revenues and expenditures with Transfers for fiscal years ending 2016 through 2021 are shown in Figure 31. The Golf cost
recovery with Transfers is between 95.18% and 117.23% over the study period. The Golf expenditures with Transfers increased
by 47.95% and the revenues with Transfers increased by 50.16% over analysis period. With the Transfers, Golf operations has
achieved greater than 100% cost recovery.
The historic rounds of Golf decreased by 47.89% between 2016 and 2019 as shown in Figure 32.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget
Revenues $397,603.00 $399,571.00 $392,093.21 $523,189.06 $526,198.00 $483,788.00
Expenditures $528,718.00 $474,641.00 $617,329.25 $721,504.15 $626,926.23 $782,248.00Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures ($131,115.00) ($75,070.00) ($225,236.04) ($198,315.09) ($100,728.23) ($298,460.00)
Cost Recovery 75.20% 84.18% 63.51% 72.51% 83.93% 61.85%
Figure 30 - Golf Revenues, Expenditures without Transfers and Cost Recovery
Golf Rounds 2016 2017 2018 2019
9-Holes 6,214 6,244 5,123 3,098
18-Holes 1,908 1,989 1,381 1,134
Total Rounds 8,122 8,233 6,504 4,232
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget
Revenues and Transfers $503,248.00 $556,400.00 $677,963.32 $812,439.06 $705,048.00 $755,665.00
Expenditures and Transfers $528,718.00 $474,641.00 $617,329.25 $721,504.15 $627,893.51 $782,248.00Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures ($25,470.00) $81,759.00 $60,634.07 $90,934.91 $77,154.49 ($26,583.00)
Cost Recovery 95.18% 117.23% 109.82% 112.60% 112.29% 96.60%
Figure 31 - Golf Revenues, Expenditures with Transfers and Cost Recovery
Figure 32 - Rounds of Golf
144
5.2.8 STAFFING
Staffing, shown in Figure 33, demonstrates consistent strength to operate and maintain facilities. The staffing is consistent over
the study period.
Nationally, municipal park operations have experienced a significant decrease in personnel due to economic conditions related to
the recession and COVID-19. Many departments are finally increasing capacity to properly maintain the system now that economic
conditions have improved. The Brookings Parks, Recreation & Forestry Department has maintained staffing.
Personnel Costs to Total Expenditures is shown in Figure 34. The Personnel costs are 50.58% to 57.81% for the analysis period.
Staffing costs are typically 55-65% of total operating budget including benefits.
The City had a Staffing Level Data Collection prepared by Public Sector Personnel Consultants in 2020. The analysis showed Brooking
in the lowest quartile for parks and recreation functions of the comparative cities. The key is to ensure there are properly
maintained staffing levels for maintenance functions as it adds sustainability to the system and is important to bring all existing
assets to their full lifecycle.
Recreation 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Aquatic Center 0 0 0 0 0 0
Recreation 2 2 2 2 3 3
Park 11 12 12 13 11 11
Ice Arena 1 1 1 1 2 2
Forestry 4 4 4 4 4 4
Golf 2 2 2 2 2 2
Total 20 21 21 22 22 22
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget
Personnel Costs $2,020,232.03 $2,097,138.68 $2,151,902.30 $2,214,603.95 $1,808,333.03 $2,274,529.00
Total Expenditures $3,993,940.05 $3,787,301.45 $4,202,550.16 $3,954,553.45 $3,122,705.81 $3,938,209.00
Personnel Costs to Total Expenditures 50.58% 55.37% 51.20% 56.00% 57.91% 57.76%
Figure 33 - Staffing
Figure 34 - Personnel Costs to Total Expenditures
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
145
5.2.9 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANNING
The City demonstrates a commitment to the Department’s facilities and infrastructure through planning investments in the Parks,
Recreation & Forestry system as shown in Figure 35.
Capital expenditures included in the operations and maintenance (O&M) budget is shown in Figure 36. The Department invested
3.85% to 22.44% of the O&M budget to capital. The 2021 budget projects investing 7.91% on capital. A nominal percent of
Capital expenditures to O&M budget is generally 4%. The Department capital is at a good level compared with similar agencies.
5.2.10 FINANCIAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
The Brookings Parks and Recreation Financial Assessment was developed from one-on-one discussions with Department and City
leadership, as well as a review of the financial information provided by the Department. The total annual operating budget for the
Park and Recreation Division is $3,938,209 which equates to $157.52 per capita and is a good number for the type of parks and
recreation services that are provided by the Department in comparison to the national average which includes capital cost.
The Department does not have a dedicated Park and Recreation Fund, but is supported primarily through the general fund, which is
primarily sales tax driven. The challenge for the Department is maintaining the current asset inventory while meeting the growth
of the City and the expectations of residents that would like to have the City provide more resources especially with the need for
an indoor space. The ability for the Department to meet the growing needs for additional park and recreation experiences will
require new financial and funding strategies.
The current level of cost recovery that derives from user fees, grants, and other type of service fees in total budget is approximately
$1,257,515 or 32% of the total budget ($3,938,209), which is close to the national average of 37% for a community the size of
Brookings according to National Recreation and Park Association. If the Department wishes to achieve this benchmark, it would
need to recover an additional approximation of $200,000 from earned income funding sources to help support the operational
budget, which can be achieved through some minor changes in how the system operates and new funding sources.
The key to any park and recreation system is how well its budget of funds is tied into a “business culture” for park and recreation
services. This requires that the Department focus on efficiency, cost of service, asset management, and the ability to maximize
earned income opportunities to offset operational costs that will provide the highest level of positive experiences for people of all
ages.
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
Vehicles and Equipment 390,000 165,000 90,000 60,000 35,000 100,000 35,000 105,000 213,000 35,000
Park Facility 163,000 300,000 255,000 529,500 295,000 155,000 30,000 125,000 125,000 0
Activity Center 50,000 141,500 0 0 0 0 0 453,175 0 62,650
Tree Planting 0 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000
Larson Ice Arena 205,350 0 38,600 450,000 285,150 447,100 822,600 89,100 105,000 0
Golf Course 165,000 151,250 175,500 115,000 309,000 180,000 308,100 189,700 215,000 36,000
Library 764,650 522,125 0 75,000 75,000 170,000 0 231,625 0 142,638
Public Art 61,569 70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000
Total Parks and
Recreation $1,799,569 $1,374,875 $654,100 $1,324,500 $1,094,150 $1,147,100 $1,290,700 $1,288,600 $753,000 $371,288
PARKS AND RECREATION 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget
Capital Expenditures in O&M Budget $896,336.81 $534,727.46 $607,828.95 $556,376.72 $120,226.25 $311,500.00
Total Expenditures $3,993,940.05 $3,787,301.45 $4,202,550.16 $3,954,553.45 $3,122,705.81 $3,938,209.00
Capital Expenditures to Total Expenditures 22.44% 14.12% 14.46% 14.07% 3.85% 7.91%
Figure 35 - Parks, Recreation & Forestry Capital Program
Figure 36 - Capital Expenditures to Total Expenditures
146
The Department strives to operate in a “business culture” where revenues and expenses are tied together. To further actualize this
culture, the Department should strive towards the following traits that should be reviewed for relevance in their financial approach
to managing the park and recreation system in the future.
COST OF SERVICE
The Department needs to track the true cost of service for both direct and indirect costs, which would allow the Department to
understand what it costs to provide and maintain a mile of trail, a sports field, a pool, a park of any type, and a playground, as well
as the cost to deliver programs and maintain recreation facilities.
Assessment
• Regarding park maintenance, the Department does track some of the direct cost, as well as the lifecycle cost of
maintaining their assets. As the City acquires additional park land and recreation facilities, staff need to increase
operational dollars as part of the budget process from existing users and new earned income opportunities so to not
overextend their budget and personnel costs.
• Cost of service tracking is inconsistent on the recreation side of the Department, specifically tracking cost of every
experience provided. Instead, many of these services are funded by taxes or a combination of user fees methods such
as program fees, admissions, permits, rentals, or partnership agreements.
Recommendation
• Develop a program management system as it relates to assessing direct and indirect programmatic cost of service
tracking of facilities and programs. This should account for labor/administrative cost, facility use values, and other
identified peripheral cost. The Department utilizes Active Net that can provide that module for the system.
• Cost of service should be updated and tracked annually for programs, facilities, and maintenance. Adjustments should
be made on pricing of partnership agreements to keep partnerships and services equitable between the user and the
Department. Unit costs should be tracked and reported to ensure there is focus on cost per experience, cost per unit,
cost per hour, cost per acre, cost per person or other programs / services they want to measure. The same would apply
to, revenue per hour, revenue per square foot, revenue per person, and revenue per user.
• Lifecycle maintenance and replacement should continue to be made a priority for existing facilities and parks to keep
these assets in the best possible condition for years to come.
PRICING
The Department needs a formal and effective Pricing Policy that is tied to direct and indirect costs and to a cost recovery goal for
each program and service provided. A Pricing Policy is based on a classification of service approach to what is a defined public good
and what is a private good within a service, as well as when and how to seek earned income dollars to support their operational
budgets at an agreeable level.
Assessment
• The Department does not have a current pricing policy to address more effective programming equity and availability of
recreational experiences, as well as how to cost out facility cost to users. Currently, there is built in levels of pricing
entitlement with special interest groups that needs to be addressed.
Recommendation
• Review current pricing practices and establish a pricing and cost recovery policy that better aligns to individuals based
upon an equity model driven through periodic updates. Continue to review the establishment of instructor costing to
revenue models, additional partnerships, and grants to leverage programs, and the increase of community events that
align with inclusive experiences in the parks.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
147
• Staff will need to be trained on the cost-of-service process and how to properly classify services, so they are
appropriately pricing services that are provided. All facilities and programs should be tied to measurable outcomes that
track, cost per experience, cost per hour, cost per square foot, cost per mile, cost per acre, and cost per game as
examples. Staff will need to be trained on how to communicate price to users as well.
• The staff should eliminate programs that are no longer cost effective and past their useful life. The alternative is to
utilize contract providers to deliver the services in a more cost-effective manner. Currently, the Department does a good
job of contracting programmers to offset fulltime programmers’ costs and this should continue where applicable.
• Continue to evaluate Partnership Agreements to show they are fair and equitable with what the Department is investing
in the partnership. The Department should not enable a partner by subsidizing them more than what is required by
agreement. As costs increase, the partners contribution should follow the City’s commitment to support the service or
facility.
STAFFING
The Department needs to track their staffing costs to include fulltime, part-time, and seasonal staff including benefits to keep staffing
costs below 60% of their total operational budget.
Assessment
• This presents a challenge for the Department, as the need to address competent staffing against available funds
continues to be seen on a local and national level.
Recommendation
• As the Department strives to develop top-tier talent, it will need to increase staff training to facilitate a comprehensive
succession plan. The Department will need to continue in-house training, while coupled with external opportunities that
extend beyond parks and recreation management to innovation in programming strategies and technology. Business
training would be useful for the following areas: cost-of-service establishment, pricing, and classifying services based
on the level of benefit received, partnership development and management, earned income development, and unit
costing. Marketing and development of services will continue to be made a priority.
• The Department will continue to strive to maintain staffing and benefit costs below 60% of the operational budget to
keep the level of operational dollars in place. This provides the best possible experience for users of all programs,
facilities, and park operations.
BUSINESS PLANNING
Most park and recreation agencies have business plans in place to manage golf course operations, aquatic facilities, community
centers, ice rinks and revenue producing facilities to meet the cost recovery goals originally established for those facilities when
they were built.
Assessment
• Currently, there are no business plans in place tied to revenue producing facilities that are tied to specific outcomes.
Recommendation
• Earned income options should be built into the budget of each revenue producing facility to help offset operational costs
from rentals, permits, user fees, sponsorships, grants, partnerships, and other revenue sources. Additional methods
should be considered to provide more financial options for staff who manage these facilities and programs for the
Department. The use of rental versus contracted space could be utilized along with equity-based fee models to provide
for sustainable programming options.
148
ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS
The following key recommendations include the following:
• The staff will strive to present key performance metrics that demonstrate efficiency and effectiveness to move from an
“effort-based culture” to an “outcome-based culture” in all areas of the system.
• All facilities will track their level of use and make changes to the programs or services if usage levels fall below 60% of
the targeted level.
• Feasibility studies should be developed for new parks and recreation facilities before they are built to ensure the City
has the revenue to support these opportunities and the Department does not get overextended. Prior to the facility
becoming operational, the Department will develop business plans to support operations and long-term asset needs.
• All partnerships will have written agreements that are reviewed and updated on an annual basis. These agreements are
as equitable as they were designed to be from the beginning.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
149
5.3 FUNDING AND REVENUE STRATEGIES
Park systems often rely on the same funding sources for their projects, programs, and capital improvements, as well as the ongoing
financial support their agency requires. Funding sources change regarding how they provide funding and what organizations they
will support.
Understanding the type of sources and opportunities available can be valuable to the sustainability of a park and recreation system.
It is important to expand the range of sources where funding is obtained and develop a strategy to locate new sources. Developing
new funding strategies, understanding what information new funding sources are available, and having the Department compliant
and being committed to the work necessary to obtain funding can be lengthy and time consuming, yet it can provide capital and
operational dollars when normal funding channels change.
The following three categories are examples of sources considered to be viable methods used in the parks and recreation industry:
• Dedicated Funding: These funds (often in the form of various tax options) are appropriated or set aside for a limited
purpose.
• Earned Income: Revenue generated by membership fees, facility rentals, program fees and other sources where the
agency is paid for services or what they provide.
• Financial Support: These monies are acquired by applying for grants, through foundation fundraising, corporations,
organizations, as well as state and federal sources.
5.3.1 DEDICATED FUNDING SOURCES
• Taxable Bonds through Voter Approved Referenda are used primarily to support the development of large community-
based projects like a community center, field house, signature park, trails system
• Transient Occupancy Tax from Hotels are used to help pay for recreation facilities that have a high level of tourism
involved such as sport tournaments for youth and adults held in the city by the Department and are used to help build
and pay for the development and management of those facilities.
• Land Value Captive Taxes such as a Tax Increment Finance Funds are used to help support community centers and
field houses whereby businesses benefit from higher property values based on their location to these amenities and the
difference between the existing property values and the new property value is used to fund the development until the
development is paid off.
• Local Improvement Districts or Business Improvement Districts are typically established in communities that
are in a downtown business district. The BID district requires 60% of the owners to support the BID before it can be put
into place and the money is used for improving the aesthetics such as streetscapes, flowers, sidewalk cleaning, signage,
sidewalk furniture, hosting concerts and special events that attract people to spend time and money in the downtown
area.
• Developer Impact Fees are used to support neighborhood park development in the property near or in their
development as a way of enticing new homeowners to move into the development. The developer pays the impact fee
at the time of the permit like impact fees for roads, sewers, and general utilities based on the value of the homes that
are being built.
• Real-Estate Transfer Fees are established at usually 1% of the sale price of a home and is paid by the buyer to
support ongoing park infrastructure in the area where the house is located.
5.3.2 EARNED INCOME
• Land Leases allow park system to lease prime property to developers for restaurants along trails or in parks, retail
operations that benefit users in the park to support the ongoing operation of the park over a period of time.
150
• Health Care/Hospital Partnerships are becoming a major partner for park and recreation agencies to help support
the development of community centers that have health related amenities in them like fitness centers, therapy pools
and walking tracks. Some health care providers put in rehab centers inside of the community center and pay the
development cost associated with the ongoing building costs.
• Fees for Services are typically used to support the operational cost and capital cost for parks and recreation programs
and amenities which is occurring in Brookings now.
• Room Override Rates from hotels used for major tournaments. These revenues go back to the city to help pay for the
management and cost of hosting the tournament.
• Establishment of a Park Foundation is an appropriate revenue source for the Department to consider especially in
a college town. The Park Foundation typically raised money for park related improvements, programs for disadvantaged
users and they support the development of new facilities that are needed in the city.
• Local Not-for-Profit Foundations Gifts usually help pay for specific music at special events or for helping to provide
a running event in the city or a sports tournament.
• Capital Fee on top of an Access Fee to pay for a revenue producing facility need. This type of fee is usually
associated with an amenity like a golf course where the users help to improve an irrigation system or improve cart paths
because they benefit most from the capital fee. The fee is removed once the improvement is paid off.
• Corporate Sponsorships help to pay for the operations of signature facilities like sports complexes, indoor community
centers, ice rinks and they pay for an impression point usually in the $0.35 to $0.50 per impression point on an annual
basis.
• Naming Rights are used to help to capitalize a community center or special use facility and typically are good for 10
to 20 years before it is removed.
• Public/ Not-for-Profit/ Private Partnerships are used to help offset operational costs or capital costs for
community-based facilities like trails, nature centers, sport complexes, community centers, ice rinks, signature parks,
special event sites that bring in and support a high level of users.
• Licensing Fees for a signature park or event that others want to use to make money from can be applied to elements
of a park from a user or business as it applies to products sold on site, music, advertising, and ongoing events to be held
on site.
• Outsource Operations to the private sector to save money where the cost is less costly to provide the same level of
service. This can be in any form of service the system provides now from contracting with instructors, managing forestry
operations, managing landscapes in the city, care of park related equipment are a few examples.
• Volunteerism is an indirect funding source use by many departments to support the operations of parks and recreation
services. The time the volunteer gives can be used for in kind support matches on state and federal grants in lieu of
money. Best practices agencies try to get 15% of the work force hours from volunteers.
• Maintenance Endowments are established as new facilities are developed like all-weather turf to support
replacement costs when the asset life is used up and need replaced.
• User Fees are currently used by the Department is using now to offset their operational cost based on the private good
that the service is providing to the user.
• Entrance Fees (pools, community centers, parks)
o Membership Fee (community centers, pools, dog parks, ice facilities, golf, tennis, etc.)
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
151
o Daily Fees
o Non-Resident Fees
o Group Fees
o Prime Time and Non-Prime Time fees
o Group and Volume Fees
o Permit Fees
o Reservation Fees
o Catering Fees
o Food Truck Fees
o Camping Fees
o Ticket Sales
o Photography Fees
o Price by loyalty, length of stay and level of exclusivity.
5.3.3 FINANCIAL SUPPORT
• Land and Water Conservation Fund is the primary funding source for federal grants and requires a match from the
local jurisdiction of 50%.
• Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) provides greenways and trails grants for park systems across the
system.
• Recreation Trails Funding Program for development of urban linkages, trail head and trailside facilities.
• Private Donations can be sought to help develop community-based facilities like community centers, sports
complexes, outdoor theatres, and nature education facilities.
152
CHAPTER SIX – ACTION PLAN
Based on community feedback, stakeholder input, technical analysis, and the priority rankings outlined within this Master Plan, the
following key initiatives and recommendations were developed to enhance the park and recreation system and position it to best
serve the current and future needs of the community. The full Action Plan can be found in Appendix 1.
6.1 KEY RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1.1 INITIATIVE #1: WELL MAINTAINED AND SAFE PARK LANDS AND TRAILS
Vision: Our vision for park land is to create the correct balance of park space dedicated to neighborhood parks, community parks
and trails across the city to ensure a balance of active parks and natural preserved areas.
Goal: Brookings Parks and Recreation provides responsible stewardship and sustainable land management of its 697.95 acres of
property, open space, trails, and natural resources.
• Opportunities for self-directed recreation are provided through an extensive system of well-maintained parks, trails, bike
paths, natural areas, and accessible open spaces.
• Neighborhood Parks and Community Parks are activated through effective park design and amenities that bring a sense of
place, support community recreation needs and create positive experiences for people of all ages.
• Trails are connected through an easy-to-understand bike pathway system of trails and on street sidewalks that allow any
user to walk, run or bike in a safe environment.
• Brookings Parks and Recreation maintains and operates a wide variety of amenities in parks both year-round and seasonally
to serve residents and visitors of all age groups in a positive and safe environment.
• Park assets are maintained in a proper lifecycle manner to encourage positive use and year-round use through appropriate
maintenance and replacement schedules as needed.
• Consistent signage to educate users about parks, wayfinding, safety, and trails are provided.
• Establish a standard for land in the system that is left in a natural state.
6.1.2 INITIATIVE #2: HIGH PERFORMING PARK AND FACILITY MANAGEMENT
Vision: Brookings Park and Recreation staff achieves high levels of community support and satisfaction and is governed and
managed in an efficient and cost-effective manner that provides great value from taxes and user fees.
Goal: Adhere to good governance and management principles and practices
• Park and Recreation Board Polices and By-laws are updated to follow responsible management of the park and recreation
system.
• The Park and Recreation Department maintains effective interagency relationships with the Public Works Department and the
City Manager’s Office.
• Updated pricing policies and partnership polices are established to create equity between partners and user groups.
• Key performance indicators will be established for all operational divisions within the park and recreation system to
demonstrate efficiency and effectiveness.
• Use technology to enhance effectiveness and efficiency of the Department will be instituted at a higher level of impact to
support the user experience with the Departments services and amenities.
• Create a volunteer program to assist with park maintenance.
• Ensure staffing of park maintenance is aligned with community expectations.
PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
153
6.1.3 INITIATIVE 3#: ENHANCE PROGRAMS, SERVICES AND EXPERIENCES
Vision: Brookings Park and Recreation vision for programs and services is to activate more park and recreation facilities that serve
a wider audience and provide residents the ability to connect to the system.
Goal: High quality recreation programs and amenities are well developed, maintained, operated, and utilized.
• Consider adding a total of two (2) to four (4) additional core programs into the system that could include: summer camps,
special events, adult fitness and wellness, environmental education, adventure programs, people with disabilities, life-long
learning, STEM, and programs for active adults.
• Develop a feasibility study for an indoor aquatic and community center facility that serves a multitude of core programs that
can support the core programs outlined in the most cost-effective manner.
• Park amenity utilization, cost recovery and user satisfaction of amenities and facilities are optimized through scheduling,
staffing and amenity access and through effective fee polices.
• A cost-of-service study is conducted on any new programs or facilities to determine the cost of operations and cost
effectiveness of each program and amenity operated.
• An effective marketing plan is created to enhance the use of all public mediums to encourage more community awareness,
use, and appreciation for program services.
6.1.4 INITIATIVE #4: ENHANCE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
Vision: Maximize the value of all parks and recreation facilities to achieve the highest value of use and return on investment.
Goal: Complete the development of a long-term capital improvement and replacement plan with funding strategy.
• Develop business plans for all revenue producing facilities within the system to maximize the use, efficiency of programs and
services, staffing and operations to reduce the need for tax support.
• A long-term funding strategy and financial plan for capital investment and reinvestment is developed and implemented.
• Consider a Business Improvement District downtown to assist in the maintenance cost.
• Consider the creation of a Park Foundation to increase capital and operational dollars to support the system as a strategic
partner.
• Evaluate land leases on excess park property for commercial investment to generate revenue to offset existing operational
costs.
• Consider a land dedication ordinance on new development to cover capital costs in lieu of park land.
• Consider an impact fee on new development to cover capital costs for future city-wide attractions.
154
CHAPTER SEVEN – CONCLUSION
The Brookings, Parks, Recreation and Forestry Department does an excellent job serving the Brookings community as evident by
the feedback received from the community throughout the master plan.
As with any quality comprehensive planning process, the community was involved throughout the development of the Master Plan
through stakeholder and focus group meetings. A total of 997 residents participated in the online and the statistically-valid survey,
as well as over 60 participants in the focus group and key stakeholder interviews. Public forums were held in the City, and a citizen
survey was offered that helped to prioritize and identify the issues that need to be addressed in the Master Plan and to support the
key recommendations that need to be implemented over the next five years.
The Brookings community takes pride in its parks and recreation system, as evident in the table below that is based on the
statistically-valid needs assessment survey results with comparison to national benchmarks.
This Master Plan establishes recommendations for Brookings to achieve the vision the community has for the park and recreation
system as well as to achieve greater financial sustainability without sacrificing the value of the park assets and amenities or
reducing the level of experiences and services available to users. Brookings already oversees an impressive inventory of parkland,
trails, and amenities with a dedicated workforce. The key is to ensure there are properly maintained staffing levels for maintenance
functions as it adds sustainability to the system and is important to bring all existing assets to their full lifecycle.
It is important that the parks and recreation system finds the balance between the existing and abundant outdoor parks and
recreation amenities, while ensuring residents have opportunities for year-round activities and facilities, which may include
additional indoor recreation space. The Master Plan is a living document with many moving components that must be achieved
simultaneously to ensure Brookings builds upon its legacy over the next five to ten years of providing a comprehensive mix of high
quality, programs, facilities, and services that contribute to Brookings high quality of life.
Action Plan
October 2021
City of Brookings Parks, Recreation & Forestry Department
Parks & Recreation Master Plan
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
1
Vision
The following vision presents how Brookings Parks, Recreation and Forestry desires to be viewed in the future:
“Brookings is a vibrant and desirable community providing attractive and well-maintained parks, trails, recreation facilities, programs, and customer
service to the community, while maintaining safe, accessible, and healthy natural park surroundings.”
Mission
The following is the mission for how Brookings Parks, Recreation and Forestry will implement the vision:
“Provide great parks, trails, recreation facilities, and programs that benefit all residents and visitors through enjoyable experiences that make
living in Brookings the community of choice.”
Organizational Values and Principles
• Organizational Effectiveness
• Collaboration
• Fiscal Accountability
• Professionalism
• Continuous Improvement
• Responsible
• Resources Conservation
• Respectful
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
2
Key Issues and Emerging Themes:
• Connected Trails System
• Indoor Recreation and Aquatic Space Needs
• Activation of Existing Parks and Facilities Through More Indoor and Outdoor Year-Round Programing
• Maintain Well What the System Owns through Capital Improvement Management
• Partnership Equity and Development
• Earned Income Development to Help offset Operational Cost.
• Policy Enhancements for Better Operations
• Marketing and Communication Enhancement Needs
• Proper Staffing for Maintenance and Operations of Program Services
Action
Plan
•Strategies -major ideas or philosophies to implement
•Tactics -helps achieve each strategy
•Group Responsible -person or persons to oversee tactics
•Start Date -when to initiate tactics
•Performance Measure -indicates desire objectives
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
3
INITIATIVE #1: WELL MAINTAINED AND SAFE PARK LANDS AND TRAILS
Vision: Our vision for park land is to create the correct balance of park space dedicated to neighborhood parks,
community parks and trails across the city to ensure a balance of active parks and natural preserved areas.
Goal: Brookings Parks and Recreation provides responsible stewardship and sustainable land management of its 697.95 acres of
property, open space, trails, and natural resources.
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
1.1 Opportunities for self-directed recreation are
provided through an extensive system of
well-maintained parks, trails, bike paths,
natural areas, and accessible open spaces.
• A portion of section 22 as identified in the Bike
Master Plan.
• Easement acquisition and grant submission for
NW portion of section1 as identified in the Bike
Master Plan.
• Easement acquisition and grant submission for
connection to new SW development.
Parks & Rec.
Public Works
Bike Committee
On going
Grant submitted
6/1/21
7/15/21
• A connected trails system
will be completed by 2030.
• Average of 1 mile per year Parks & Rec.
Public Works
Bike Committee
1/1/22 • A connected trails system
will be completed by 2030.
• Provide policies for trails and open space
development that requires developers to
connect to the system.
Community
Development
1/1/22 • Developer agreements will
require trail connections to
the loop system where
appropriate made as part
of the developer
agreements with the city.
• Link trail system to key attractions in the City
(e.g., downtown, university, etc.)
Parks & Rec.
Public Works
Bike Committee
Ongoing • Links to key attractions in
will be a priority via
walking, running, or
bicycling in partnership
with the Downtown
Development Group, SDSU
and other key partnership
agencies.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
4
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
1.2 Neighborhood Parks and Community Parks
are activated through effective park design
and amenities that bring a sense of place,
support community recreation needs and
create positive experiences for people of all
ages.
• Evaluate underutilized amenities for
removal/replacement.
Parks Department Ongoing • Annually evaluate use of
existing parks and site
amenities and provide a
strategy to remove or
enhance park amenities
with neighborhood support
to ensure there is positive
use in each park.
• Update site master plans at parks that receive
low use to reinvigorate them so there is
positive use for people of all ages.
Parks Department 4/15/22 • Develop a scoring system
of use for the park system
parks that demonstrates
underutilized parks and a
process to enhance them.
• The city will look for fees in lieu of from
developers versus accepting property with
limited access and user use capability.
Community
Development
4/15/22 • Update the develop impact
fees with more options for
the city to accept fees in
lieu of land from
developers.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
5
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
1.3 Trails are connected through an easy-to-
understand bike pathway system of trails and
on street sidewalks that allow any user to
walk, run or bike in a safe environment.
• Establish a well-designed Wayfinding System
via the city’s website, access trail maps, on-
street signage on how to connect and use the
trail system, and the trail goes in the city.
Bike Committee 6/1/24 • Wayfinding system is
designed and put into
place on trails by the end
of 2024.
• Utilize a mobile application for trail map
linkages.
Community
Development (GIS)
Parks Department
8/1/24 • Mobile app put into place
by the end of 2024 and an
assessment of the number
of users in completed in
2025.
• Seek user feedback on how effective the
wayfinding system is working as well as the
signage in the system.
Bike Committee 1/1/26 • User evaluation of the
wayfinding system
receives a 90+% approval
rating for access and
accuracy.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
6
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
1.4 Brookings Parks and Recreation maintains
and operates a wide variety of amenities in
parks both year-round and seasonally to
serve residents and visitors of all age groups
in a positive and safe environment.
• Evaluate all parks every five years to ensure
amenities and experiences are working
collectively together in a positive manner.
Parks Department 9/15/21 • All parks will have an
updated review that
matches the master plan
process every five years.
• Introduction of new types of amenities in the
system to broaden user types where
appropriate.
Parks Department 8/1/21
Ongoing
• At least one new amenity
is added to the system
each year to broaden user
appeal.
• Consider the development of a sled hill,
miracle field for people with disabilities,
outdoor office space, Wi-Fi in parks, and a
large group shelters, etc. as capital funding is
available
Parks Department On going • Look for partners to help
create these spaces in
parks to lower the capital
cost where appropriate.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
7
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
1.5 Park assets are maintained in a proper
lifecycle manner to encourage positive use
and year-round use through appropriate
maintenance and replacement schedules as
needed.
• As part of a Golf Master Plan include a cart
path planning at Edgebrook Golf Course.
Golf staff 1/1/22 • Cart path program updated
over a five-year timeframe
• Resurface 50 parking spaces per year. Public Works 7/15/22 • At least 50 parking spaces
are updated annually
• Addition of 2 playgrounds per year. Parks Department 1/1/23 • At least two playgrounds
are updated each year to
get on a 15-year upgrade
basis per playground
• Resurface .75 trail miles per year. Parks Department
Public Works
8/1/21 • 5% of the trail system is
updated each year.
• Continue proactive tree replacement program
as the Emerald Ash Borer becomes a detriment
to the tree canopy.
Forestry Division Ongoing • Tree replacement program
schedule is put into place
based on operational
dollars agreed to each
year in the budget process.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
8
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
1.6 Consistent signage to educate users about
parks, wayfinding, safety, and trails are
provided.
• Update parks that have inconsistent signage to
make the parks brand stronger and
identifiable. (Lions, Sexauer)
Park Admin. 1/1/23 • Develop a signage
program that is approved
by the City Manager’s
office that is consistent
across the city in parks,
trails, and attractions.
• Create Wayfinding to key attractions. Darren
Street Department
1/1/24 • Apply the wayfinding
system to apps and to
social media applications.
• Work with Brookings Area Attractions on
signage/wayfinding for parks, facilities, and
events.
Darren 1/1/24 • Wayfinding system is in
place by the end of 2025.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
9
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
1.7 Establish a standard for land in the system
that is left in a natural state.
• Create a policy that determines the percentage
of park land that will remain in a natural state
as a percentage of total park land acres.
Parks Admin.
Park Board
3/15/24 • Park Board and City
Managers office approve
the properties that will be
left in a natural state as
part of the park and
recreation system by the
end of 2024.
• Develop a natural resource management plan
working with the University to maintain these
properties so they remain as pristine as
possible.
Parks & Forestry 1/1/25 • Over a five-year period,
establish a resource
management plan for each
natural area sites working
with students at the
University to maximize the
value of the land for future
generations. Completed
by the end of 2027.
• Sign natural areas lands appropriately so the
community understands the Departments
management practices for those properties.
Parks Department Ongoing • Sign natural land
properties appropriately
so the community
understands the
management practices for
each site and how to use
them. This will be
completed over the next
five years.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
10
INITIATIVE #2: HIGH PERFORMING PARK AND FACILITY MANAGEMENT
Vision: Brookings Park and Recreation staff achieves high levels of community support and satisfaction and is
governed and managed in an efficient and cost-effective manner that provides great value from taxes and user fees.
Goal: Adhere to good governance and management principles and practices
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
2.1 Park and Recreation Board Polices and By-
laws are updated to follow responsible
management of the park and recreation
system.
• A board policy workshop will be developed by
the Director to review existing policies and by-
laws to ensure they are relevant today and
remove or change ones that are not.
Park Admin.
Park Board
6/1/22 • Board policy workshop to
be held with the Park
Board in 2022.
• Provide example by-laws from other agencies
to help enhance the key elements that will
help govern the organization moving forward.
Park Admin.
Pros
4/1/22 • Examples of by-laws from
other South Dakota cities
will be reviewed for best
practices that could be
incorporated into the Park
and Recreation Department
to manage in the most
productive manner.
• Implement policies that reflect appropriate
management and training for the Park Board.
Park Admin.
Park Board
7/1/22 • Teach and train existing
and future board members
on the key bylaws of the
Recreation and Park
Advisory Board over the
next year starting in 2022.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
11
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
2.2 The Park and Recreation Department
maintains effective interagency relationships
with the Public Works Department and the
City Manager’s Office.
• Interagency agreements are outlined for how
to work with public works and city’s managers
office on key components that are outside of
parks and recreation responsibilities to help
manage the city for the future.
Park Admin.
Public Works
City Manager’s office
Ongoing • Interagency agreements
are created on an annual
basis and cost out as part
of the budget process.
• Create an annual meeting on expectations and
changes within the Departments, as well as
exchange of in-kind services and cost out
those services so all parties know the level of
investment each partner is making in each
other’s work requirements.
Park Admin.
Public Works
10/1/21 • Evaluation of the
agreements between inter-
agencies to determine the
level of effort required and
the cost will be reviewed
on an annual basis
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
12
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
2.3 Updated pricing policies and partnership
polices are established to create equity
between partners and user groups for the
level of benefit they receive beyond what a
general taxpayer receives to offset
operational and maintenance costs.
Partnership groups understand their roles
and responsibilities in the use of park lands
for special events, sporting events, and
games to not do any level of detriment to the
fields they are permitted to use.
• Each sports groups/association meets annually
with the Parks Department to review
partnership agreement.
Park Admin. 11/1/21 • Sports agreements
updated annually with cost
to be shared by both
parties to ensure that
fairness exist between the
city and the partners
involved.
• School District and Parks Department meet
annually on partnership agreement.
Park Admin. 11/1/21 • School District and Parks
and Recreation update
their agreement every
three years.
• Consider the creation of a Sports Group
Association that includes parks, SDSU, schools,
and all the sports groups to maximize
community space.
Park Admin. 11/1/21 • Sports Group Association is
put into place between all
key players by the end of
2022.
• Coordinated strategy with all sports groups,
schools, and SDSU on schedules, key issues,
and registrations to maximize community
space.
Park Admin. 11/1/21 • Annual overview of what
worked well and did not
work well for sports
facilities both indoor and
outdoor and how to
improve on the use to
maximize the value, cost
and revenue that can be
created to offset
operational costs.
• Partnership policies for public/public,
public/not-for-profit and public/private are
established and approved.
Park Admin.
City Attorney
Park Board
11/1/21 • Partnership policies will be
approved by the end of
2022.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
13
• Establish partnership meetings with each
partner group to review existing agreements
in place and update them to be as fair and
equitable as possible as it applies to the level
of investment each group is putting into the
partnership.
Parks Admin.
City Attorney
11/1/21 • All partnership groups will
have a working
partnership agreement
that describes why the
city, and their organization
is doing the partnership,
for what purpose, for what
benefit, at what cost, and
how each partner will
share in the cost to
implement the partnership
elements to be as fair and
equitable as possible.
• Working agreements with public/public,
public/not-for-profit/, public/private that
demonstrate equity and fairness in
responsibilities.
Parks Admin.
City Attorney
Park Board
11/1/21 • All partnerships will have
an approved and updated
policy by the end of 2025.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
14
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
2.4 Key performance indicators will be
established for all operational divisions
within the park and recreation system to
demonstrate efficiency and effectiveness.
• Create performance measures for each
division and add a couple of new ones each
year as needed for parks, forestry, golf,
recreation, and administration.
Divisional staff 12/1/21 • Establish five performance
indicators for each division
to begin the process in
2022.
• Develop KPI’s that focus on efficiency and
effectiveness with at least five KPI’s per
division: number of trees planted, revenue
earned at golf course,
Divisional Staff 1/1/22 • Focus on at least four
performance indicators on
Efficiency and four on
Effectiveness
• Assign a person within the Department to
track and report out results at least twice a
year
Darren 1/1/22 • One person is responsible
to track the performance
indicators and work with
staff on how to report out
their results.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
15
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
2.5 Use technology to enhance effectiveness and
efficiency of the Department will be instituted
at a higher level of impact to support the user
experience with the Departments services
and amenities.
• Track cost elements of parks maintenance, and
programs that focus on direct and indirect
costs.
Parks Staff 10/1/21 • Cost of service assessment
will be completed by the
end of 2021 for park
maintenance and program
services
• Use Active Net to track households in the city
that use recreation services as well as age
groups served by type of program. Track
return rate of users to programs offered to
establish retention rates.
Recreation 1/1/22 • Data reports will be
developed with Active Net
to establish key metrics to
inform staff on program
impacts to households in
Brookings by January
2022.
• Consider work order management software
but ensure it can be implemented and is
accessible to staff. This will help staff to track
true cost to maintain sports fields, a mile of
trail, an acre of park land and the cost to
maintain facilities
Parks Staff
1/1/25 • Evaluate maintenance
work order systems to
purchase that provides
cost of service data, tracks
Lifecyle maintenance
requirements and unit
costs so that as new
development comes online
the appropriate amount of
dollars are budgeted to
take care of what has been
built.
• Work with Visit Brookings to track economic
impact of sports tournaments to demonstrate
to the community the economic impact that
sports tournaments have on the community as
well as special events provided by the
Department.
Recreation 6/1/22 • Work with Visit Brookings
to set up a sports
tournament survey of
spending by teams in
Brookings for various
sports and its financial
impact to the community
by 2022.
2
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
16
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
2.6 Create a volunteer program to assist with
park maintenance.
• Recruit a volunteer coordinator to implement
the volunteer program.
Parks Admin 8/1/21 • Develop an ad to place into
the newspaper looking for
a volunteer to manage the
volunteer program for the
department.
• 5% of total hours of system is produced by
volunteers.
Office staff
Human Resources
1/1/24 • Establish what the total
paid hours are for the
department as a whole and
track volunteer time
against it to seek a goal of
5% of total hours working
in parks is completed by
volunteers for 2023.
• Use volunteers on park maintenance related
services such as downtown plantings, facility
and park areas, and community gardens.
Parks Staff
Volunteer Coordinator
Downtown group
3/1/22 • Work with the business
community to help recruit
volunteers to help
maintain plants and
flowers downtown. Include
opportunities to use
college students to help
with plantings.
• Develop a volunteer recognition program. Office Staff 3/1/22 • Research volunteer
recognition programs and
pick a program that
matches the values of the
city for volunteer
recognition in the city and
implement it in 2022.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
17
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
2.7 Ensure staffing of park maintenance is
aligned with community expectations.
• Develop maintenance standards for all major
functions of park maintenance and teach and
train staff to achieve those standards as it
applies to parks, sports fields, golf, trails,
flower management, courts, pools, and
forestry.
Park Staff 3/1/22 • Training program set up
for all park maintenance
standards on how to
implement and track in
2021.
• Train volunteers on maintenance standards as
well to help support fulltime and part-time
staff achieve the standards established
Parks Staff
Volunteer Coordinator
3/1/23 • Volunteers trained on
maintenance standards as
part of their training and
how to apply them to park
maintenance in the parks.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
18
INITIATIVE 3#: ENHANCE PROGRAMS, SERVICES AND EXPERIENCES
VISION: Brookings Park and Recreation vision for programs and services is to activate more park and recreation
facilities that serve a wider audience and provide residents the ability to connect to the system.
Goal: High quality recreation programs and amenities are well developed, maintained, operated, and utilized.
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
3.1 Consider adding a total of two (2) to four (4)
additional core programs into the system that
could include: summer camps, special events,
adult fitness and wellness, environmental
education, adventure programs, people with
disabilities, life-long learning, STEM, and
programs for active adults.
• Two new core programs will be established for
the next three years primarily focused on
camps, special events, environmental
education and adventure programs, and adult
wellness and fitness programs
Recreation staff 6/1/21 • Two core programs are
incorporated each year
beginning in 2022 to
broaden the use of parks
by the community.
• Create events that brings the community
together that may include Corporate Games.
Recreation Staff 6/1/21 • Establish at least one
major special event the
Department will host each
year starting with
corporate games.
• Nature education special events that are tied
to art at the Nature Park.
Recreation Staff
Public Arts Comm.
3/1/24 • Work with the
environmental community
to create a nature themed
special event for the
community to enjoy and
provide events for all ages
in 2025.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
19
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
3.2 Develop a feasibility study for an indoor
aquatic and community center facility that
serves a multitude of core programs that can
support the core programs outlined in the
most cost-effective manner.
• Develop an RFP to send out to design
architects and feasibility consultants to
develop a feasibility study for a community
center that includes four main focus areas that
include an aquatic center, gym, walking track
and wellness and fitness center at a minimum.
Parks Admin.
Recreation Staff
3/1/23 • RFP put out in 2023 and
completed in 2023.
• Creation of a task force made up of potential
partners and key leaders.
City Manager
Parks Admin
1/1/23 • Task for set up as part of
the RFP process and
included in all phases of
the work to be completed
by the design and
feasibility team
• Develop a process for the community center
task force to follow to start the process of
determining if there is enough community
support to construct and operate a new
community center in the community
Parks Admin. 9/1/22 • Community Center put to a
vote in 2024 if all elements
are feasible.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
20
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
3.3 Park amenity utilization, cost recovery and
user satisfaction of amenities and facilities
are optimized through scheduling, staffing
and amenity access and through effective fee
polices.
• Fee policy is updated to reflect the level of
cost recovery desired for various programs
and facilities to achieve a cost recovery goal
for the Department as a whole
Park Admin
Park Board
1/1/23 • Fee policy put into place in
2023.
• Establish cost recovery goals for specific core
programs.
Park Admin
Park Board
3/1/22 • Cost recovery goals are
approved by the Park
Board in 2022.
• Teach and train staff on how to communicate
cost recovery goals to the community
correctly.
Parks Staff
Recreation Staff
3/1/23 • Staff training on cost
recovery, costing of
services and pricing
completed in 2023.
3.4 A cost-of-service study is conducted on any
new programs or facilities to determine the
cost of operations and cost effectiveness of
each program and amenity operated.
• Establish the cost recovery framework for
staff to cost out each type of program they
provide based on the cost of service and how
the program is classified as core essential,
important and value added.
Park Admin
Recreation Staff
1/1/23 • Cost of service study is
completed in 2023.
• Determine price points based on the level of
service provided and the classification
determined.
Park Admin
Recreation Staff
Park Board
3/1/23 • Pricing policy approved in
2023.
• Inform users of any changes that will occur
based on the formula put into place.
4/1/23 • Pricing services instituted
into the program services
catalog in 2023.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
21
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
3.5 An effective marketing plan is created to
enhance the use of all public mediums to
encourage more community awareness, use,
and appreciation for program services.
• Establish a process to implement the plan and
the operational dollars to do so in the 2022
budget. Focus on all levels of media tools to
delver the message to encourage the highest
level of use in the park system.
City Marketing
Specialist
Recreation Staff
8/1/21 • Budget 5% of the total
parks and recreation
budget for the marketing
plan development and
ongoing marketing of
programs and services on
a yearly basis.
• Market community-wide special events, as
well as art in the parks.
Recreation Staff Ongoing • Develop a marketing
strategy with Visit
Brookings to market city
wide special events.
• Create a themed identity of the park system to
bring greater recognition on the value of
parks.
City Marketing
Specialist
1/1/23 • Create a theme that
depicts the value of parks
to a person in the
community such as “live a
park life”
• When developed, market the Parks Foundation
and the ability to raise money in the
community for parks.
City Marketing
Specialist
Park Admin
1/1/23 • Create a market strategy
for the Parks Foundation
that focuses on three items
each year. One, is to raise
money for a needed capital
amenity that is outlined in
the master plan each year.
Two, to raise money for
scholarships for
individuals in the
community who need
added resources to cover
their program costs. Three,
to raise money for
operational cost to cover a
part-time person to
manage the foundation.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
22
INITIATIVE #4: ENHANCE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
Vision: Maximize the value of all parks and recreation facilities to achieve the highest value of use and return on
investment.
Goal: Complete the development of a long-term capital improvement and replacement plan with funding strategy.
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
4.1 Develop business plans for all revenue
producing facilities within the system to
maximize the use, efficiency of programs and
services, staffing and operations to reduce
the need for tax support.
• Develop a business plan for the Larsen Ice
Center. Larson Ice Center operates at 50%
cost recovery.
Park Admin
Recreation/Ice Staff
1/1/24 • Achieve 50% cost recovery
or greater based on
implementing the business
plan.
• Develop business plan for Edgebrook Golf
Course. Edgebrook Golf Course operates at
100% cost recovery.
Park Admin.
Golf Staff
Park Board
1/1/22 • The golf course will
achieve 100% cost
recovery or greater each
year by implementing the
plan.
• Develop a business plan for the Aquatic
Center. Aquatic Center operates at 50% cost
recovery.
Park Admin.
Recreation Staff
1/1/23 • The aquatic center will
achieve 50% or greater
cost recovery each year.
• Develop a mini business plan for each core
program in the system.
Park Admin.
Recreation Staff
1/1/22 • Develop two mini business
plans each year for each
core program area offered
in the system.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
23
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
4.2 A long-term funding strategy and financial
plan for capital investment and reinvestment
is developed and implemented.
• TIF financing is used to help finance large
capital projects that support economic
development in the community and draw from
a larger audience outside of the city to help
support capital projects.
Finance
City Manager
Park Admin
Community
Development
9/1/21 • Work with the school
district to allow areas of
the city to be TIF for large
community-based projects
such as a community
center to help pay for the
development costs.
• Food and beverage tax and hotel occupancy
tax should be considered for development of
large community capital projects like a large
community center to support the operational
and capital costs of the facility.
Finance
City Manager
Park Admin
Community
Development
1/1/23 • Work with the businesses
and Visit Brookings to
establish a dedicated food
and beverage tax on fast
food only and a percentage
of the TOT tax for
development of revenue
producing park and
recreation improvements
that bring hotel stays and
fast-food sales that
support the facilities that
create these events.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
24
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
4.3 Consider a Business Improvement District
downtown to assist in the maintenance cost.
• Outline the cost to maintain existing plants
and beautification downtown on a yearly basis
and what the improvement district could
support to enhance the downtown area even
stronger.
Downtown Sector
Parks staff
11/1/21 • A cost per flower bed and
cost per hanging basket is
established as a way to
inform people of the cost
and how to finance the
beautification program
each year.
• Find volunteer groups to help in planting areas
of downtown to help offset operational costs
that could include rotary clubs, fraternities and
sororities at SDSU, gardening clubs and
businesses adopt a street program.
Volunteer Coordinator
Downtown Brookings
Asst. City Manager
2/1/22 • Find volunteer groups to
do three flowerpot
plantings a year in the
spring summer and fall
with two major cleanups in
May and in September of
streets and sidewalks
• Ask business owners to support a business
improvement district for keeping downtown
beautiful on a year-round basis including snow
season.
Downtown Brookings
Asst. City Manager
1/1/24 • Develop a business owner
task force to head up the
recruitment of businesses
to develop the BID District
and put into place by 2025.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
25
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
4.4 Consider the creation of a Park Foundation to
increase capital and operational dollars to
support the system as a strategic partner.
• Work with the Community Foundation to see if
they would support a specific park foundation
in the city.
Park Admin.
City Manager
12/1/21 • Community Foundation
Supports the Development
of a standalone Parks
Foundation by 2023.
• Develop a campaign of items that could be
gained by a park foundation to demonstrate
the value and need for one in the city.
Park Admin.
Community
Foundation
1/1/24 • Create a market strategy
for the Parks Foundation
that focuses on three items
each year. One, is to raise
money for a needed capital
amenity that is outlined in
the master plan each year.
Two, to raise money for
scholarships for
individuals in the
community who need
added resources to cover
their program costs. Three,
to raise money for
operational cost to cover a
part-time person to
manage the foundation..
• Establish a Foundation Membership program to
draw awareness to the foundation.
10/1/23 • Develop a list of 50 people
in Brookings who could
become members as a
launch to the start of the
foundation.
• Seek Foundation Board members who are
capable of making significant financial
contributions to the foundation to support
getting it started and established in Brookings.
• Establish Foundation By
laws and 501-C3 status
once approval by City
Council, and Community
Foundation is gained.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
26
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
4.5 Evaluate land leases on excess park property
for commercial investment to generate
revenue to offset existing operational costs.
• Develop a land lease program with the city’s
planning department to consider park
locations that are not being used for park
purposes that could be considered for
commercial uses on a long-term lease basis.
Park Admin.
Community
Development
1/1/24 • Land lease opportunities
are identified by 2025 and
appraised for lease value.
• Look at locations along park trails for coffee
shops, food restaurants, and retail bike shops
as opportunities to serve bike trail users as
well as the public.
Park Admin.
Community
Development
1/1/24 • Develop a RFI process to
seek interest in the
community for private
development on park land
on a long-term lease basis.
• Consider land leases for facilities that would
support sports complexes as well
• Look for opportunities for
complementary retail
operations next to sports
complexes especially those
involving youth programs
for restaurants, retail
operations that
compliment the sports
being played on the
complex.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
27
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
4.6 Consider a land dedication ordinance on new
development to cover capital costs in lieu of
park land.
• Seek out land developers on their support for
a land dedication ordinance to seek fees in lieu
of park development to be paid to the
Department for larger park space and more
development of the sites.
Park Admin.
Community
Development
8/1/23 • Develop a park
development task force
with developers to support
a land dedication
ordinance.
• Land dedication ordinance is put into place and
approved by City Council.
Finance
City Manager
Park Admin
Community
Development
9/1/21 • Land dedication ordinance
adopted by 2025 that
allows the city to accept
land from a developer for
park purposes or fees in
lieu of the land.
• Seek land from developers to develop park
trails to neighborhoods areas to provide a
safe link to get on to the trail system
throughout the city.
Bike Committee 8/1/21 • Seek support for allowing
developers to link to spine
trails in the city to link
their development to a
connected park system in
the city as part of their
impact fee.
Brookings Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Action Plan
28
Strategy Tactics Group Responsible Start Date Performance Measure
4.7 Consider an impact fee on new development
to cover capital costs for future city-wide
attractions.
• Work with the planning department for
creating an impact fee for parks for new
development and redevelopment of areas of
the city.
Park Admin.
Community
Development
3/1/24 • Demonstrate the cost
benefit of an impact fee in
the city-to-city council and
to developers by 2025.
• Park impact fee should be created on new
development to pay for the cost of
neighborhood parks for the development.
Park Admin.
Community
Development
3/1/24 • Update the park impact fee
to accurately account for
the cost to develop a
neighborhood park beyond
the land and a playground
• Demonstrate the potential opportunities for
parks with having an impact fee and how
communities of similar size have used this
funding source for park improvements that
benefit the whole community as well as the
development of the site.
Park Admin.
Community
Development
3/1/24 • Share examples that are
real in the city where the
impact fee can benefit the
developer and the
community via a park
improvement.
(June 1st 2021) 001BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
ARROWHEAD PARK
General Site Description:
Amenities and Conditions:
Strengths and Opportunities:
CONDITION KEY: (+) EXCELLENT (0) GOOD (-) NEEDS ATTENTION
SIZE: 11.6 acres
DESIGNATION: Neighborhood Park
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: Stormwater Maintenance
•Basketball Court: -
•Playground Equipment 01: +
•Playground Equipment 02: -
•Tennis Court / Pickleball: -
•Fishing Pond: -
•Recreation Trail: +
•Restroom: +
•Small Shelter: 0
STRENGTHS:
1. Modern Restroom
2. Trail Access
3. Diverse Park Features
IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Upgrade/Update 2-5 Playground Equipment
2. Playground Swing-Set Update
3. Court Resurfacing (Tennis and Basketball)
4. Fishing Pond Renovation
5. North Pond Renovation
• Minimal Depth - +/-2’ Depth
• Timber Outflow Control
1115 Indian Hills Road
(June 1st 2021) 002BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
Photo Inventory:
Image 1: Existing Restroom
Image 3: Existing Bike / Walking Trail
Image 5: Existing Fishing Pond
Image 2: Existing Tennis Court
Image 4: Existing Small Playground Equipment
Image 6: Existing Park Context
(June 1st 2021) 003BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
CAMELOT PARK
Christine Avenue & Yorktown Drive
General Site Description:
Amenities and Conditions:
Strengths and Opportunities:
CONDITION KEY: (+) EXCELLENT (0) GOOD (-) NEEDS ATTENTION
SIZE: 7.3 acres
DESIGNATION: Neighborhood Park
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: None Noted
•Off-Street Parking: +
•Multi-Purpose Field: 0
•Youth Baseball/Softball Fields with Backstops: 0
•Playground Equipment: 0
•Restrooms: +
•Recreation Trail: +
STRENGTHS:
1. Neighborhood Location
2. Open Lawn Space
3. Trail Access
IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. ADA Access Path to Small Play Equipment
(June 1st 2021) 004BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
DAKOTA NATURE PARK
22nd Avenue S. & 32nd Street
General Site Description:
Amenities and Conditions:
Strengths and Opportunities:
CONDITION KEY: (+) EXCELLENT (0) GOOD (-) NEEDS ATTENTION
SIZE: 135 acres
DESIGNATION: Special Use Park
ESTABLISHED: 2013
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: Wood Structure Maintenance
•Fishing Ponds: +
•Greenspace - Undeveloped: +
•Recreation Trails: +
•Larson Nature Center: +
•Restroom: 0
STRENGTHS:
1. Open Space
2. Pond Access with Rentals
3. Walking and Biking Paths
IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Trail Repairs
2. Develop Sledding Area
3. Expanded Single Track Routes
• North of Softball
• Along 22nd Avenue
4. Integrated Art/Nature Exhibits
5. Programming Partnerships with Outdoor Adventure Center
6. Special Event Opportunities (Parking Limitations)
(June 1st 2021) 005BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
Photo Inventory:
Image 1: Existing Fishing Pond & Trail
Image 3: Existing Nature Park Map / Wayfinding Signage
Image 5: Existing Equipment Storage Shed
Image 2: Existing Dock / Canoe & Kayak Launch
Image 4: Existing Restroom
Image 6: Existing Fishing Pond
(June 1st 2021) 006BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
DWIGGINS - MEDARY PARK
621 Medary Avenue South
General Site Description:
Amenities and Conditions:
Strengths and Opportunities:
CONDITION KEY: (+) EXCELLENT (0) GOOD (-) NEEDS ATTENTION
SIZE: 22.5 acres
DESIGNATION: Community Park
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: Sports Field Maintenance,
Stormwater Maintenance
•Bob Sheldon Competition Ballfield: +
•Youth Baseball/Softball Ballfields (5): 0
•Off-Street Parking: +
•Skateboard Park: 0
•Restrooms: +
STRENGTHS:
1. Bob Sheldon Competition Field Updates
2. Parking Lot Updates
3. Drainage Improvements
IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Consider Relocation of Existing Youth Baseball 4-Plex and
Explore Opportunities for Alternative Use of That Site
(June 1st 2021) 007BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
1415 22nd Avenue South
General Site Description:
Amenities:
SIZE: 150 acres
DESIGNATION: Public Municipal Golf Course
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: Turf Maintenance,
Course Maintenance
•Regulation 18 Hole Golf Course
•Nine-Hole, Par Three Golf Course
•Driving Range
•Free Practice Green and Chipping Green
•Pro Shop
EDGEBROOKGOLF COURSE
IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Improve or Reduce Existing 9-Hole Executive Course
2. Possible Pickleball Location (Six Court Minimum)
3. Explore Integration of Pay-to-Play Disc Golf
4. Clubhouse Remodel
5. Cart Path Improvements
6. Irrigation Replacement
7. Pond Renovations - Increase Depth
(June 1st 2021) 008BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
1100 20th Street South
General Site Description:
Amenities and Conditions:
Strengths and Opportunities:
CONDITION KEY: (+) EXCELLENT (0) GOOD (-) NEEDS ATTENTION
SIZE: 91 acres
DESIGNATION: Special Use Park
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: Sports Field Maintenance
•Soccer Fields: +
•Scoreboards: +
•Picnic Shelter: +
•Restrooms: +
•Concession Building: +
•Off-Street Parking: +
•Recreation Trail: +
STRENGTHS:
1. Field Conditions and Maintenance
2. Paved Walkways Throughout
3. Parking and Access
4. Modern Restroom and Concessions
IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Possible Location for Additional Ballfields
2. Add Playground
3. Add Internal Trails and Park Open Space
4. Possible Miracle Field Location (Accessible Baseball)
FISHBACK SOCCER COMPLEX
(June 1st 2021) 009BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
HILLCREST PARK
1520 6th Street and 17th Avenue
General Site Description:
Amenities and Conditions:
Strengths and Opportunities:
CONDITION KEY: (+) EXCELLENT (0) GOOD (-) NEEDS ATTENTION
SIZE: 19.2 acres
DESIGNATION: Community Park
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: Aquatics Maintenance,
Courts Maintenance
•Aquatic Center: +
•Basketball Court: -
•Picnic Shelters: +
•Multi-Purpose Field: 0
•Playground Equipment 01: 0
•Playground Equipment 02: -
•Recreation Trail: 0
•Tennis Courts (10): +
•Horseshoe Pits (12): +
•Outdoor Grill Stations: +
•Storage Building: +
•Restrooms: 0
•Off-Street Parking: 0
STRENGTHS:
1. Diverse Park Features
2. Mature Tree Canopy
IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Accessible Playground Surfacing
2. Remove Basketball East Court
3. Playground Replacement
4. Add Outdoor Fitness Equipment Near Playground
5. Possible Pickleball Location (Six Court Minimum)
6. Tree Replacement
7. Add Permanent Cornhole Courts
8. Add Food Truck Accommodations
9. Add Public WiFi Access
(June 1st 2021) 010BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
Image 1: Existing Playground Equipment
Image 3: Existing Playground Equipment
Image 5: Existing Storage and Concessions Building
Image 2: Existing Swing Set
Image 4: Existing Playground Equipment
Image 6: Existing Park Picnic Shelter and Outdoor Grills
Photo Inventory:
(June 1st 2021) 011BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
Image 7: Existing Age 2-5 Playground Equipment
Image 9: Existing Park Signage
Image 11: Existing Tennis Courts with Lighting
Image 8: Existing ‘Born Learning’ Trail
Image 10: Existing Age 2-5 Playground Slide
Photo Inventory:
(June 1st 2021) 012BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
Half Moon Road & Santee Trail
General Site Description:
Amenities and Conditions:
Strengths and Opportunities:
CONDITION KEY: (+) EXCELLENT (0) GOOD (-) NEEDS ATTENTION
SIZE: 3.9 acres
DESIGNATION: Mini Park
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: None Noted
•Basketball Court: -
•Multi-Purpose Field: 0
•Playground Equipment: +
•Tennis Court: -
•Recreation Trail: 0
STRENGTHS:
1. Trail Access
2. Updated Playground Equipment and Surfacing
IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Court Surfaces and Fencing
2. Remove Tennis Court and Fencing
INDIAN HILLS PARK
(June 1st 2021) 013BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
LARSON ICE CENTER
924 32 nd Avenue
General Site Description:
Amenities and Conditions:
Strengths and Opportunities:
CONDITION KEY: (+) EXCELLENT (0) GOOD (-) NEEDS ATTENTION
SIZE: 66,750 SF
DESIGNATION: Special Use Facility
ESTABLISHED: 2002
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: Ice Maintenance
•Two Regulation Ice Rinks
•Stadium Seating (1,350 Red Rink + 450 Blue Rink)
•Asphalt Parking: -
•Flooring: 0
STRENGTHS:
1. Two Sheets of Ice for Convenient Scheduling and Ice Time for
City Programs.
IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Resurface Parking Areas
2. HVAC Upgrades / Dehumidification System (Blue Rink)
3. Lobby Floor Replacement
4. Possible Development of Holding Barn Area
(June 1st 2021) 014BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
LARSON PARK
22nd Avenue & Eastbrook Drive
General Site Description:
Amenities and Conditions:
Strengths and Opportunities:
CONDITION KEY: (+) EXCELLENT (0) GOOD (-) NEEDS ATTENTION
SIZE: 18.7 acres
DESIGNATION: Community Park
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: Stormwater Maintenance,
Outdoor Ice Maintenance
•Basketball Court: +
•Disc Golf Course: +
•Playground Equipment: +
•Recreation Trail: 0
•Seasonal Ice Rink: 0
•Restroom: 0
•Off-Street Parking: -
•Trail Lighting: -
STRENGTHS:
1. Updated Playground Equipment with ADA Surfacing
2. Diverse Park Features and Multi-Seasonal Interest
3. Picnic Areas
4. Mature Trees
IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Parking Lot Improvements
2. Location for Large Event Shelter
3. East Pond Landscape
4. Trail Lighting
5. Possible Outdoor Office Site
6. Develop Sledding Area
7. Add Public WiFi Access
(June 1st 2021) 015BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
Image 1: Existing Picnic Lawn
Image 3: Existing Open Green Space and Disc Golf Course
Image 2: Existing Retaining Wall
Image 4: Existing Sculpture
Photo Inventory:
(June 1st 2021) 016BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
LIONS PARK
Medary Avenue & RR Tracks
General Site Description:
Amenities and Conditions:
Strengths and Opportunities:
CONDITION KEY: (+) EXCELLENT (0) GOOD (-) NEEDS ATTENTION
SIZE: 2.3 acres
DESIGNATION: Mini Park
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: Outdoor Ice Maintenance
•Basketball Court: 0
•Off-Street Parking: 0
•Picnic Shelter: +
•Multi-Purpose Field with Backstop: 0
•Playground Equipment 01: +
•Playground Equipment 02: -
•Restroom: 0
•Signage: 0
•Outdoor Ice Staking Area: 0
STRENGTHS:
1. Updated Playground Equipment
2. Accessible Picnic Shelter
3. Open Lawn / Ballfield
4. Neighborhood Location
5. Mature Trees
IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Basketball Court ADA Access
2. Basketball Court Resurfacing
3. Update Small Playground Equipment
4. Possible Pickleball Location (Six Court Minimum)
5. Possible Futsal Court Location
6. Parking Improvements
7. Evaluate Ballfield Need
8. Upgrade Park Signage
(June 1st 2021) 017BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
Image 1: Existing Park Restroom Building
Image 3: Existing Small Playground Equipment
Image 5: Existing Seasonal Ice Rink and Lighting
Image 2: Existing Ballfield and Backstop
Image 4: Existing Playground Equipment
Image 6: Existing Playground Equipment and Swing Set
Photo Inventory:
(June 1st 2021) 018BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
15 th Street & 7th Avenue
General Site Description:
Amenities and Conditions:
Strengths and Opportunities:
CONDITION KEY: (+) EXCELLENT (0) GOOD (-) NEEDS ATTENTION
SIZE: 3.4 acres
DESIGNATION: Mini Park
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: None Noted
•Basketball Court: 0
•Multi-Purpose Field with Backstop: -
•Playground Equipment 01: 0
•Playground Equipment 02: 0
•Interpretive Signage: +
STRENGTHS:
1. Trail Access
IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Basketball Court Resurfacing
2. Playground ADA Access
3. Playground Equipment and Surfacing Updates
4. Evaluate Need for Backstop
5. Plan for the Continuation of 15th Street and 7th Avenue
McCLEMANS PARK
(June 1st 2021) 019BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
Image 1: Existing Multi-Purpose Field Backstop
Image 3: Existing Interpretive Signage
Image 5: Existing Bark Park Connection
Image 2: Existing Multi-Purpose Field Backstop
Image 4: Existing Interpretive Signage
Image 6: Existing Bike / Walking Trail
Photo Inventory:
(June 1st 2021) 020BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
17 th Avenue & Pebble Beach Drive
General Site Description:
Amenities and Conditions:
Strengths and Opportunities:
CONDITION KEY: (+) EXCELLENT (0) GOOD (-) NEEDS ATTENTION
SIZE: 10.6 acres
DESIGNATION: Neighborhood Park
ESTABLISHED: 2008
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: Stormwater Maintenance
•Basketball Court: +
•Multi-Purpose Field: 0
•Playground Equipment: +
•Sand Volleyball Court: +
•Youth Baseball/Softball Field with Backstop: +
•Picnic Shelter: +
•Recreation Trail: +
•Restrooms: +
STRENGTHS:
1. New Playground Equipment
2. Large Open Green Space and Ballfield
3. Paved Walkways Throughout
IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Potential Splash Park Location
2. Trail Loop Connection (North End)
3. Basketball Court ADA Access
MORIARTY PARK
(June 1st 2021) 021BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
Image 1: Existing Park Picnic Shelter and Outdoor Grills
Image 3: Existing Sand Volleyball Court
Image 2: Existing Restroom Building
Image 4: Existing Ballfield and Backstop
Photo Inventory:
(June 1st 2021) 022BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
NORTHBROOK PARK COMMUNITY GARDENS
US Highway 14 Bypass & Medary Avenue
General Site Description:
Amenities and Conditions:
CONDITION KEY: (+) EXCELLENT (0) GOOD (-) NEEDS ATTENTION
SIZE: 60 acres
DESIGNATION: Special Use Park
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: Garden Preparation,
Road Maintenance
•Community Gardens: +
•Go-Kart Track: -
•Small Shelter: +
•Restroom: +
IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Single Track Trails
2. Possible Location for Sledding Area
3. Possible Location for Campground Expansion
4. Possible Location for 9-Hole Disc Golf
5. Consider 2nd Community Garden Location Near Airport
(June 1st 2021) 023BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
PHEASANT NEST/BARK PARK
12 th Street S. & 7th Avenue S.
General Site Description:
Amenities and Conditions:
Strengths and Opportunities:
CONDITION KEY: (+) EXCELLENT (0) GOOD (-) NEEDS ATTENTION
SIZE: 11 acres/ 11,000 SF
DESIGNATION: Neighborhood Park
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: Stormwater Maintenance,
Turf Maintenance
•Fenced Dog Park: +
•Agility Obstacles: +
•Pet Waste Stations: +
STRENGTHS:
1. Fully Fenced Areas for Large and Small Dogs
2. Adequate Size
3. Double-Gated Entry
4. Pet Waste Stations
IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Bare Turf Areas
2. Small Dog Amenities / Obstacles
3. New Tree Plantings (Protected)
(June 1st 2021) 024BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
Image 1: Existing Fence and Shrub Screening
Image 3: Existing Signage and Rules Board
Image 2: Existing Fence and Shrub Screening
Image 4: Existing Entry Double Gate
Photo Inventory:
(June 1st 2021) 025BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
6th Street & First Avenue
General Site Description:
Amenities and Conditions:
Strengths and Opportunities:
CONDITION KEY: (+) EXCELLENT (0) GOOD (-) NEEDS ATTENTION
SIZE: 17 acres
DESIGNATION: Community Park
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: Special Event Preparation
•Basketball Court: -
•Bandshell: 0
•Multi-Purpose Field: 0
•Playground Equipment 01: +
•Playground Equipment 02: +
•Sand Volleyball: 0
•Historic Pioneer Cabin: 0
•Pollinator Garden: +
•Park Monument Sign: +
•Picnic Shelter: 0
•Restrooms: 0
•Gravel Parking Lot: -
STRENGTHS:
1. Diverse Park Features
2. Mature Tree Canopy
IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Park Development Opportunity at Area of Existing Gravel
Parking Lot - Pickleball/Basketball Courts
2. Reconfigure South Walking Paths
3. Evaluate Basketball Court
4. Band Shell Interior Repairs
5. Possible Pickleball Location (Six Court Minimum)
6. Consider Adding Park Accent Lighting
7. Add Public WiFi Access
PIONEER PARK
(June 1st 2021) 026BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
Image 1: Existing Playground Equipment
Image 3: Existing Gravel Parking Lot
Image 5: Existing Sand Volleyball Court
Image 2: Existing Playground Equipment
Image 4: Existing Interpretive Signage
Image 6: Existing Basketball Court
Photo Inventory:
(June 1st 2021) 027BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
Western Avenue & Regency Court
General Site Description:
Amenities and Conditions:
Strengths and Opportunities:
CONDITION KEY: (+) EXCELLENT (0) GOOD (-) NEEDS ATTENTION
SIZE: 2.7 acres
DESIGNATION: Mini Park
ESTABLISHED: 2006
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: None Noted
•Basketball Court: +
•Multi-Purpose Field: +
•Playground Equipment: -
•Bike / Walking Trail: +
STRENGTHS:
1. Updated Playground Equipment
2. Mature Trees
3. Large Open Lawn Space
IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Update Playground Equipment
SARAH RENEE PARK
(June 1st 2021) 028BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
11 th Street & Third Avenue
General Site Description:
Amenities and Conditions:
Strengths and Opportunities:
CONDITION KEY: (+) EXCELLENT (0) GOOD (-) NEEDS ATTENTION
SIZE: 19.5 acres
DESIGNATION: Community Park
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: Camp Site Maintenance,
Camp Site Management
•Campground (18 Sites + Tent Camping): +
•Multi-Purpose Field: 0
•Playground Equipment: +
•Sand Volleyball Courts (5): +
•Restrooms: +
STRENGTHS:
1. Camp Sites with Utility Hook-Ups
2. Modern Support Building
3. Large Multi-Purpose Field
IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Sand Volleyball Courts Edge Improvements
2. Bike Trail Extension
3. Consider Adding Dog Park (East Side of Park)
4. Update Park Signage
SEXAUER PARK & CAMPGROUND
(June 1st 2021) 029BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
Image 1: Existing Campground with Electricity
Image 3: Existing Tent Campsite
Image 5: Existing Restroom Building
Image 2: Existing Campground with Electricity
Image 4: Existing Playground Swing Set
Image 6: Existing Restroom Building
Photo Inventory:
(June 1st 2021) 030BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
22nd Avenue S.
General Site Description:
Amenities and Conditions:
Strengths and Opportunities:
CONDITION KEY: (+) EXCELLENT (0) GOOD (-) NEEDS ATTENTION
SIZE: 25 acres
DESIGNATION: Special Use Park
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: Sport Field Maintenance
•Ballfields (5): +
•Picnic Shelter: +
•Restrooms/Concessions: -
•Off-Street Parking: 0
STRENGTHS:
1. Field Conditions and Maintenance
2. New Fencing and Shade Structures
3. Parking and Access
IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Update Restroom/ Concession Area
2. Interior Walkway Improvements
3. Parking Area Improvement
4. Addition of Playground Area
5. Complex Interior Landscaping
SOUTHBROOK
SOFTBALL COMPLEX
(June 1st 2021) 031BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
Main Avenue & 2nd Street
General Site Description:
Amenities and Conditions:
Strengths and Opportunities:
CONDITION KEY: (+) EXCELLENT (0) GOOD (-) NEEDS ATTENTION
SIZE: 3.5 acres
DESIGNATION: Mini Park
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: Sport Field Maintenance,
Outdoor Ice Maintenance
•Basketball Court: 0
•Youth Baseball/Softball Field with Backstop & Outfield Fence: +
•Playground Equipment: +
•Restroom: +
•Off-Street Parking: 0
STRENGTHS:
1. Updated Playground Equipment with ADA Access
2. New Ballfield Fencing and Backstop
3. Neighborhood Proximity / Connections
4. Future Field Lighting Upgrades
SOUTHSIDE PARK
(June 1st 2021) 032BROOKINGS PARKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PARK INVENTORY
Rapid Valley Street
General Site Description:
Amenities and Conditions:
Strengths and Opportunities:
CONDITION KEY: (+) EXCELLENT (0) GOOD (-) NEEDS ATTENTION
SIZE: 2.7 acres
DESIGNATION: Mini Park
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE: Stormwater Maintenance
•Playground Equipment: +
STRENGTHS:
1. New Playground Equipment
2. ADA Access
VALLEY VIEW PARK
2021
City of Brookings
Community
Interest and
Opinion Survey
Findings Report
Presented to the
City of Brookings,
South Dakota
April 2021
Page i
Page 1
Page 40
Page 54
Page 62
Page 108
Executive Summary
Page i
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Page ii
This report contains:
Charts showing the overallresults of the survey (Section 1)
Benchmark Analysis comparingthe City’s results to nationalresults (Section 2)
Priority Investment Ratings(PIR) Analysis that identifiespriorities for facilities/amenities and programs/activities in the community(Section 3)
Tabular Data showing theoverall results for all questionson the survey (Section 4)
A copy of the surveyinstrument (Section 5)
The goal was to obtain 375
completed surveys from
City residents. A total of
432 surveys were
collected.
The overall results for a
sample of 432 surveys have
a precision of at least +/-
4.6% at the 95% level of
confidence.
ETC Institute mailed a survey packet to a random sample of households in the City of Brookings. Each survey
packet contained a cover letter, a copy of the survey, and a postage-paid return envelope. Residents who received
the survey were given the option of returning the survey by mail or completing it online at
www.BrookingsSurvey.org.
Approximately seven to ten days after the surveys were mailed, ETC Institute sent emails to the households that
received the survey to encourage participation. The emails contained a link to the online version of the survey to
make it simple for residents to complete. To prevent people who were not residents of the City from participating,
everyone who completed the survey online was required to enter their home address prior to submitting the
survey. ETC Institute then matched the addresses that were entered online with the addresses that were
originally selected for the random sample. If the address from a survey completed online did not match one of
the addresses selected for the sample, the online survey was not counted.
ETC Institute administered a community interest and opinion survey in March 2021 for the City of Brookings, South
Dakota. This study was administered as part of the City’s efforts in updating its Parks and Recreation System Master
Plan. In this process, it is important for the City to identify future priorities of recreation and parks amenities,
facilities, programs, and activities. Information gathered from the assessment will provide data that will help
determine priorities which then leaders can use to make decisions that will meet community and resident needs.
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Page iii
City Park and Facility Use. Residents surveyed were asked, in the last 12-months, if they or
members of their household have used any parks or facilities offered by the Brookings Parks,
Recreation, and Forestry Department. Eighty-six percent of residents indicated they have and
14% responded that they have not.
City Park and Facility Ratings.
Of the residents that had indicated
they have used a park/facility in
the last 12-months (86%); 39%
gave the overall quality of parks/
facilities a rating of excellent, 52%
gave the overall quality of parks/
facilities a rating of
good, 8% rated the overall quality
of parks/facilities as fair, and less
than a percent (0.5%) of residents
gave the overall quality of parks/
facilities a rating of poor. Figure 1
to the right shows the ratings
respondents’ gave for the overall
quality of parks/facilities.
Satisfaction with Parks and Recreation Services. The services that residents are most satisfied with, based
on the sum of very satisfied and satisfied responses, are:
maintenance of parks/facilities (79%),
overall quality of sports fields (72%),
amount of open greenspace (71%), and
park and facility accessibility (68%).
The Parks and Recreation services that residents think should receive the most attention from Brookings
over the next five years, based on the sum of respondents’ top three choices, are:
amount of available indoor space (40%),
connectivity of trails and pathways (33%),
maintenance of parks/facilities (22%), and
quality/number of outdoor amenities (19%).
Figure 1
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Page iv
Facility Needs. Respondents were asked to identify if their household had a need for 32 facilities and rate how
well their needs for each were currently being met. Based on this analysis, ETC Institute was able to estimate
the number of households in the community that had the greatest “unmet” need for various facilities. The four
facilities with the highest percentage of households whose needs for facilities are being met 50% or less are
listed below.
Indoor Swimming Pools/Leisure Pool: 3,762 households (or 38%)
Indoor Running/Walking Track: 3,327 households (or 34%)
Sledding Hill: 3,019 households (or 31%)
Indoor Fitness and Exercise Facilities: 2,620 households (26%)
The estimated number of households that have unmet needs for each of the 32 facilities that were assessed is
shown in Figure 2 below.
Figure 2
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Page v
Facility Importance. In addition to assessing the needs for each facility, ETC Institute also assessed the
importance that residents placed on each one. Based on the sum of respondents’ top four choices, the most
important facilities to residents were:
walking/hiking trails (45%),
paved bike trails (36%),
natural areas and wildlife habitats (27%), and
small neighborhood parks (26%).
The percentage of residents who selected each facility as one of their top four choices is depicted in Figure 3
below.
Figure 3
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Page vi
Priorities for Facility Investments. The Priority Investment Rating (PIR) was developed by ETC Institute to
provide organizations with an objective tool for evaluating the priority that should be placed on Parks and
Recreation investments. The Priority Investment Rating (PIR) equally weighs (1) the importance that residents
place on each facility/amenity/program and (2) how many residents have unmet needs for the
facility/amenity/program. Details regarding the methodology for this analysis are provided in Section 3 of the
report.
Based on the Priority Investment Rating (PIR), the seven facilities were rated as high priorities for investment
are listed below.
1. Walking paths/sidewalks (PIR=200.0)
2. Natural parks and preserves (PIR=160.0)
3. Picnic areas/shelters (PIR=120.4)
4. Walking/running tracks (PIR=119.6)
5. Smaller neighborhood parks (PIR=116.4)
6. Community gardens (PIR=113.5)
7. Restrooms (PIR=107.5)
Figure 3 below shows the PIR for each amenity that was rated.
Figure 4
Priorities for Facility/Amenity Investments. The Priority Investment Rating (PIR) was developed by ETC
Institute to provide organizations with an objective tool for evaluating the priority that should be placed on
Parks and Recreation investments. The Priority Investment Rating (PIR) equally weighs (1) the importance
that residents place on each facility/amenity/program and (2) how many residents have unmet needs for the
facility/amenity/program. Details regarding the methodology for this analysis are provided in Section 3 of
the report. Based on the Priority Investment Rating (PIR), the five facilities were rated as high priorities for
investment are listed below.
Walking/Hiking Trails (PIR=155.7)
Indoor Swimming Pools/Leisure Pool (PIR=136.6)
Indoor Running/Walking Track (PIR=119.5)
Paved Bike Trails (PIR=114.7)
Natural Areas and Wildlife Habitats (PIR=108.6)
Figure 4 below shows the PIR for each facility that was rated.
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Page vii
Program Participation. Three out of ten residents (30%) indicated that they or members of their
household have participated in recreation programs, offered by the Parks, Recreation, and Forestry
Department, in the last 24-months. Seven out of ten residents (70%) indicated they have not
participated in recreation programs offered in the last 24-months.
Program Ratings. Of the households that indicated they have participated in recreation programs in the last 24-
months (30%); 29% rated the overall quality of programs a rating of excellent, 60% rated the overall quality of
programs as good, and 12% rated the overall quality of programs as fair.
Preferred Time of Day for Various Age Groups to Participate. A portion of this survey was created to analyze
what the preferred time of day, for different age groups (children, youth, teen, adults, older adults, and the
family), to participate in recreation programs. The most preferred time of day for each age group is below.
There is not a significant preferred time of day for households with children (under the age of 6 years
old) to participate in programs. Twenty-seven percent (27%) of households with children indicated the
evening (27%), then morning (26%), afternoon (23%), and 24% said anytime is the best preferred time.
The most preferred time of day for households with youth (6 to 12 years old) to participate in programs
is the evening (29%), followed by anytime (27%) and afternoon.
The most preferred time of day for households with teens (13 to 17 years old) to participate in programs
is the evening (37%).
The most preferred time of day for adults (18 to 59 years old) to participate in programs is the evening
(54%).
Thirty-nine percent (39%) of households with older adults (60 years or older) indicated that the most
preferred times of the day to participate in programs is anytime and the morning (27%).
The preferred times of day for families to use recreation programs are the evening (44%) and anytime
(37%)
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Page viii
Figure 5
Program Needs. Respondents were asked to identify if their household had a need for 26 programs and rate
how well their needs for each were currently being met. Based on this analysis, ETC Institute was able to
estimate the number of households in the community that had the greatest “unmet” need for various
programs. The four programs with the highest percentage of households whose needs are being met 50% or
less are listed below.
Adult Fitness and Wellness Programs: 3,405 households (34%)
Travel and Tourism (day trips): 2,474 households (25%)
Water Fitness Programs: 2,360 households (24%)
Nature Programs: 2,089 households (21%)
The estimated number of households that have unmet needs for each of the 26 programs that were assessed is
shown in Figure 5 below.
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Page ix
Program Importance. In addition to assessing the needs for each program, ETC Institute also assessed the
importance that residents placed on each one. Based on the sum of respondents’ top four choices, the most
valuable programs to residents were:
adult fitness and wellness programs (32%),
nature programs (21%),
youth learn to swim programs (18%), and
water fitness programs (16%).
The percentage of residents who selected each program as one of their top four choices is depicted in Figure 6
below.
Figure 6
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Page x
Figure 7
Priorities for Program Investments. Details regarding the methodology for this analysis are provided above on
Page vi and in Section 3 of the Findings Report. Based on the Priority Investment Rating (PIR), the five
programs were rated as high priorities for investment are listed below.
Adult Fitness and Wellness Programs (PIR=200.0)
Nature Programs (PIR=127.0)
Water Fitness Programs (PIR=119.2)
Special Events (PIR=107.7)
Travel and Tourism/Day Trips (PIR=107.7)
Figure 7 below shows the PIR for each program that was rated.
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Page xi
Organizations Used for Indoor/Outdoor Recreation Activities. From a list of eleven (11)
organizations available for indoor/outdoor recreation activity use, respondent households were
asked what organizations they have used during the last 12-months. The top three organizations,
that the highest percentage of respondents have visited in the last 12-months, are:
Brookings Parks, and Forestry Department (57%),
churches (44%), and
South Dakota State University (38%).
The two organizations used by the least percentage of residents are the Boys and Girls Club (12%) and
homeowners associations/apartment complex (7%).
Methods Residents Use to Learn About Programs and Services. Residents surveyed were given fourteen (14)
methods of communication used for residents to learn about Brookings Parks, Recreation, and Forestry
Department programs and services. The top three methods of communication, that the highest percentage of
respondents use most to learn about programs and services, are:
from friends and neighbors (56%),
newspaper articles (47%), and
the website (44%).
The four methods used by the least percentage of respondents are: the monthly eNewsletter (3%), Instagram
(1%), NextDoor (3%), and Twitter (2%). The methods that residents indicated are their most preferred ways
to learn about programs and services, based on the sum of respondents’ top three choices, are:
by the website (41%),
Department program guide (35%),
newspaper articles (34%), and
Facebook (34%).
Barriers to Facility and/or Program Use/Participation. From a list of twenty-one (21) potential reasons,
respondent households were asked to indicate the reasons that deter them from using parks, recreation
facilities, or programs that are offered by Brookings Parks, Recreation, and Forestry more often. The top four
reasons/barriers given, by residents, were:
I do not know what is being offered (24%),
we are too busy (19%),
program or facility is not offered (15%), and
program times are not convenient (12%).
Twenty-seven percent (27%) of residents surveyed responded that nothing deters them/their household from
participating in or using parks/recreation facilities or programs.
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Page xii
Program Costs. Residents surveyed were asked to indicate their opinion about what percent of
Brookings Parks, Recreation, and Forestry Department program costs should be paid by taxes and
what percentage should be paid by user fees. The table below shows the sum percentage of
residents that indicated program costs should be paid by 25% to 100% of taxes. The top three
programs, that residents think costs should be paid by a percentage (25%-100%) of taxes, are:
programs for special populations/disabled (95%),
programs for low-income residents (94%), and
learn to swim programs (91%).
The top three programs, that residents think costs should be paid by a percentage (25%-100%) of user fees,
are:
adult sports programs (96%),
adult classes such as exercise, arts, dance, etc. (96%), and
fiend rentals for adult sports tournaments (95%).
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Page xiii
Potential Improvements. Residents were asked to give their opinion on how much they would
support actions that Brookings Parks could take to improve the Parks and Recreation system. The
actions with the highest levels of support, based on the sum of very supportive and somewhat
supportive responses by residents who had an opinion, are listed below.
Improve existing paved walking and biking trails (82%)
Improve existing small neighborhood parks (80%)
Improve existing large community parks (80%)
The potential actions that are most important to residents, based on the sum of respondents’ top three
choices, are: improve existing paved walking and biking trails (33%), develop new trails that connect to existing
trails (29%), and develop a new indoor recreation center (25%).
Improvement Funding. The level of support that households have for potential funding mechanisms that could
be used to pay for improvements are listed below. Based on the sum of very supportive and somewhat
supportive responses, the top three potential funding mechanisms residents support to pay for improvements,
are:
program user fees for recreational programs (71%),
enterprise operations (68%), and
hotel tax (66%).
The potential funding mechanisms that residents most support, based on the sum of respondents’ top three
choices, are a hotel tax (41%) and program user fees for recreational programs (39%).
Funding Priorities. Residents were asked to give their opinion on how to budget and allocate funds among
categories of funding that were listed. If residents were given $100 (hypothetically), based on survey results,
how they would prioritize funding is listed below.
$27.69 for developing indoor facilities.
$21.53 for constructing new walking and biking trails and to improve existing trails where needed.
$14.50 for improving existing neighborhood and community parks.
$12.89 for improving existing outdoor facilities.
$12.54 for acquiring new parkland and open space for parks.
$10.85 for developing additional outdoor facilities.
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Page ivx
Program
Priority
Investments
Facility
Priority
Investments
To ensure that the City of Brookings continues to meet the needs and
expectations of the community, ETC Institute recommends that the Parks
and Recreation Department sustain and/or improve the performance in
the areas that were rated as high priorities, as indicated by the Priority
Investment Rating (PIR).
The facilities and programs with the highest PIR ratings are listed below.
1. Adult Fitness and Wellness Programs
(PIR=200.0)
2. Nature Programs (PIR=127.0)
3. Water Fitness Programs (PIR=119.2)
4. Special Events (PIR=107.7)
5. Travel and Tourism/Day Trips
(PIR=107.7)
1. Walking/Hiking Trails (PIR=155.7)
2. Indoor Swimming Pools/Leisure
Pool (PIR=136.6)
3. Indoor Running/Walking Track
(PIR=119.5)
4. Paved Bike Trails (PIR=114.7)
5. Natural Areas and Wildlife Habitats
(PIR=108.6)
Overall Results
Page 1
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
86%
14%
Yes
No
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
by percentage of respondents
Q1. In the last 12 months, have you or other members of your household
used any parks or facilities offered by the Brookings Parks, Recreation
and Forestry Department?
Page 2
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
39%
52%
8%
1%
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
Q1a. How would you rate the overall quality of parks or facilities that you
and members of your household have used?
by percentage of respondents who have used parks or facilities offered by the Brookings Parks, Recreation and Forestry
Department in the last 12-months
0.5%
Page 3
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
30%
70%
Yes
No
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
by percentage of respondents
Q2. In the last 24 months, have you or other members of your household
participated in any recreation programs offered by the Parks, Recreation
and Forestry Department?
Page 4
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
29%
60%
12%
Excellent
Good
Fair
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
Q2a. How would you rate the overall quality of programs that you and
members of your household have participated in?
by percentage of respondents who have participated in any recreation program(s) offered by the Brookings Parks,
Recreation and Forestry Department in the last 24-months
Page 5
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q3. Organizations that households have used for indoor and outdoor
recreation activities during the last 12 months.
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
57%
44%
38%
30%
28%
22%
17%
15%
13%
12%
7%
11%
Brookings Parks, & Forestry Dept.
Churches
South Dakota State University
School districts
South Dakota State Recreation Areas
Youth sports associations
Private clubs (tennis, fitness & dance)
Neighboring communities
Travel sports teams
Boys & Girls Club
Homeowners associations/apartment complex
None. Do not use any organizations
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%
by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be selected)
Page 6
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q4. Ways Residents Learn About Brookings Parks, Recreation, and Forestry
Department Programs and Services.
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
56%
47%
44%
40%
39%
29%
22%
16%
7%
4%
3%
3%
3%
2%
From friends & neighbors
Newspaper articles
Website
Department program guide
Facebook
Radio
At parks & facilities
School flyers/newsletters
Cable access television
Department staff
Monthly eNewsletter
Instagram
NextDoor
Twitter
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%
by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be selected)
3%
3%
2%
Page 7
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
41%
35%
34%
34%
23%
16%
11%
11%
10%
3%
3%
2%
1%
0%
Website
Department program guide
Newspaper articles
Facebook
From friends & neighbors
Radio
Monthly eNewsletter
School flyers/newsletters
At parks & facilities
Instagram
Cable access television
Twitter
Department staff
NextDoor
0%10%20%30%40%50%
Most Preferred 2nd Choice 3rd Choice
by percentage of households who selected the items as one of their top three choices
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
Q5. Residents Preferred Ways to Learn About Programs and Services
0.2%
Page 8
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q6. Reasons That Deter Households From Using Parks, Recreation Facilities
or Programs of Brookings Parks, Recreation and Forestry More Often
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
27%
24%
19%
15%
12%
9%
7%
7%
5%
4%
4%
4%
4%
4%
3%
3%
2%
1%
0%
0%
8%
Nothing deters me from participating
I do not know what is being offered
We are too busy
Program or facility not offered
Program times are not convenient
Class full
Fees are too high
Facility operating hours not convenient
I do not know locations of facilities
Facilities are not well maintained
Lack of quality programs
Use services of other agencies
Registration for programs is difficult
Facilities do not have right equipment
Lack of accessibility
Lack of parking
Use facilities in other communities
Too far from our residence
Security is insufficient
Poor customer service by staff
Language barriers are difficult
None. I do not use facilities
0%5%10%15%20%25%30%
by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be selected)
2%
1%
1%
0.2%
0.2%
Page 9
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
50%
39%
30%
16%
12%
11%
10%
9%
9%
4%
5%
4%
24%
30%
25%
29%
24%
23%
20%
20%
14%
10%
8%
10%
15%
15%
26%
36%
40%
38%
29%
33%
32%
27%
22%
24%
5%
10%
10%
11%
15%
18%
23%
19%
25%
29%
29%
29%
5%
6%
9%
9%
10%
10%
18%
19%
20%
30%
35%
33%
Programs for special populations/disabled
Programs for low-income residents
Learn to swim programs
Youth sports programs
Youth classes (arts, dance, etc.)
Youth camps
Senior adult classes
Field rentals for youth sports tournaments
Special events & festivals
Adult sports programs
Field rentals for adult sports tournaments
Adult classes (exercise, arts, dance, etc.)
0%20%40%60%80%100%
100% taxes/0% fees 75% taxes/25% fees 50% taxes/50% fees
25% taxes/75% fees 0% taxes/100% fees
Q7. What percent of Brookings Parks, Recreation and Forestry Department
program costs should be paid by taxes and what percent by user fees?
by percentage of respondents using a 5-point scale, where 5 means “100% taxes/0% fees” and 1 means “0% taxes/100% fees”
(without “don’t know”)
Page 10
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
26%23%
27%24%
Morning
Afternoon
Evening
Anytime
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
Q8. Preferred Time of Day Children (under the age of 6 years old) Would
Prefer to Use Recreation Programs Offered by Brookings Parks, Recreation
and Forestry Department
by percentage of respondents with children, under 6 years, living in their household (without “n/a”)
Page 11
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
17%
26%
29%
27%
Morning
Afternoon
Evening
Anytime
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
Q8. Preferred Time of Day Youth (6-12 years old) Would Prefer to Use
Recreation Programs Offered by Brookings Parks, Recreation
and Forestry Department
by percentage of respondents with youth, 6 to 12 years old, living in their household (without “n/a”)
Page 12
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
7%
25%
37%
30%
Morning
Afternoon
Evening
Anytime
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
Q8. Preferred Time of Day Teens (13-17 years old) Would Prefer to Use
Recreation Programs Offered by Brookings Parks, Recreation
and Forestry Department
by percentage of respondents with a teen(s), 13 to 17 years old, living in their household (without “n/a”)
Page 13
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
7%
8%
54%
31%
Morning
Afternoon
Evening
Anytime
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
Q8. Preferred Time of Day Adults (18-59 years old) Would Prefer to Use
Recreation Programs Offered by Brookings Parks, Recreation
and Forestry Department
by percentage of respondents with adults, 18 to 59 years old, living in their household (without “n/a”)
Page 14
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
27%19%
15%
39%
Morning
Afternoon
Evening
Anytime
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
Q8. Preferred Time of Day Older Adults (60 years or older) Would Prefer to
Use Recreation Programs Offered by Brookings Parks, Recreation
and Forestry Department
by percentage of respondents with older adults, 60 years or older, living in their household (without “n/a”)
Page 15
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
6%
13%
44%
37%
Morning
Afternoon
Evening
Anytime
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
Q8. Preferred Time of Day the Whole Family Would Prefer to Use Recreation
Programs Offered by Brookings Parks, Recreation
and Forestry Department
by percentage of respondents (without “n/a”)
Page 16
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q9. Households’ Need for Parks and Recreation Facilities
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
81%
72%
71%
70%
69%
66%
50%
44%
44%
43%
41%
38%
36%
34%
28%
26%
25%
25%
25%
21%
20%
20%
19%
17%
17%
17%
16%
13%
10%
10%
9%
4%
Walking/hiking trails
Small neighborhood parks
Natural areas & wildlife habitats
Large community parks
Paved bike trails
Picnic areas & shelters
Outdoor swimming pools/splash pads
Indoor running/walking track
Indoor swimming pools/leisure pool
Indoor fitness & exercise facilities
Playground equipment
Sledding hill
Golf courses
Community gardens
Camping
Multipurpose fields for practice & open play
Off-leash dog parks
Outdoor basketball courts
Indoor basketball/volleyball/pickleball courts
Disc golf courses
Indoor playground
Mountain biking/single track
Outdoor tennis courts
Youth soccer fields
Youth baseball & softball fields
Outdoor ice-skating rinks
Indoor field house sports fields
Pickleball courts
Youth football fields
Skate parks
Adult softball fields
Adult soccer fields
0%20%40%60%80%
by percentage of respondents that responded “yes" to having a need (multiple choices could be selected)
Page 17
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Estimated Number of Households That Have a Need for Facilities
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
7,969
7,138
7,030
6,960
6,862
6,565
4,924
4,390
4,390
4,281
4,093
3,727
3,569
3,322
2,788
2,561
2,452
2,422
2,422
2,086
1,968
1,948
1,898
1,691
1,691
1,691
1,552
1,285
1,028
939
890
435
Walking/hiking trails
Small neighborhood parks
Natural areas & wildlife habitats
Large community parks
Paved bike trails
Picnic areas & shelters
Outdoor swimming pools/splash pads
Indoor running/walking track
Indoor swimming pools/leisure pool
Indoor fitness & exercise facilities
Playground equipment
Sledding hill
Golf courses
Community gardens
Camping
Multipurpose fields for practice & open play
Off-leash dog parks
Outdoor basketball courts
Indoor basketball/volleyball/pickleball courts
Disc golf courses
Indoor playground
Mountain biking/single track
Outdoor tennis courts
Youth soccer fields
Youth baseball & softball fields
Outdoor ice-skating rinks
Indoor field house sports fields
Pickleball courts
Youth football fields
Skate parks
Adult softball fields
Adult soccer fields
by number of households (based on an estimated 9,887 households in the City of Brookings, SD)
Page 18
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
63%52%51%
60%
52%54%
38%
47%
50%
47%
39%
40%
36%46%
47%
55%
40%
47%
36%19%
27%
20%
21%
19%
16%
21%
8%13%
5%
7%
7%
6%
23%32%33%
24%
30%27%43%33%29%29%
34%
34%
37%24%21%12%27%
18%
27%38%22%23%20%19%
20%
10%
22%11%15%
12%
7%
4%
11%13%15%
8%
15%14%14%17%15%12%
19%
20%
16%16%
20%
23%
21%
24%
16%24%
34%
35%
30%
17%
26%
27%
14%15%
29%
12%
11%
6%
3%
2%
1%
7%
3%
4%
4%
2%
4%
6%
6%
5%
12%11%
6%
9%
8%
6%
11%8%
17%
11%
17%
17%
21%
21%
23%23%
27%
26%
23%
24%
1%
1%
0%
0%
1%
1%
1%
5%
1%
1%
2%
7%
1%
5%
6%
10%11%
12%
13%
28%
17%
21%
33%38%
25%
43%
52%
60%
Adult softball fields
Playground equipment
Golf courses
Youth soccer fields
Picnic areas & shelters
Large community parks
Paved bike trails
Disc golf courses
Small neighborhood parks
Outdoor swimming pools/splash pads
Natural areas & wildlife habitats
Walking/hiking trails
Outdoor basketball courts
Outdoor tennis courts
Community gardens
Youth baseball & softball fields
Mountain biking/single track
Adult soccer fields
Multipurpose fields for practice & open play
Skate parks
Youth football fields
Outdoor ice-skating rinks
Off-leash dog parks
Indoor fitness & exercise facilities
Camping
Pickleball courts
Indoor field house sports fields
Indoor running/walking track
Indoor basketball/volleyball/pickleball courts
Sledding hill
Indoor swimming pools/leisure pool
Indoor playground
0%20%40%60%80%100%
100% Met 75% Met 50% Met 25% Met 0% Met
Q9. How Well Households’ Need for Facilities Are Being Met
by percentage of respondents, using a 5-point scale, where 5 means “100% Met” and 1 means “0% Met”
Page 19
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
Estimated Number of Households Whose Need for Facilities
Are Being Met 50% or Less
673
643
526
127
3,7623,3273,0192,6202,0961,9281,8491,7771,7761,4991,4661,3241,3021,1871,1751,0911,076972947883
649
589563556
436406281154
Indoor swimming pools/leisure pool
Indoor running/walking track
Sledding hill
Indoor fitness & exercise facilities
Walking/hiking trails
Indoor basketball/volleyball/pickleball courts
Natural areas & wildlife habitats
Indoor playground
Camping
Small neighborhood parks
Off-leash dog parks
Paved bike trails
Large community parks
Outdoor swimming pools/splash pads
Picnic areas & shelters
Indoor field house sports fields
Community gardens
Outdoor ice-skating rinks
Multipurpose fields for practice & open play
Pickleball courts
Outdoor basketball courts
Mountain biking/single track
Playground equipment
Golf courses
Youth baseball & softball fields
Outdoor tennis courts
Youth football fields
Disc golf courses
Skate parks
Youth soccer fields
Adult soccer fields
Adult softball fields
0 750 1,500 2,250 3,000 3,750 4,500
50% Met 25% Met 0% Met
by number of households (based on an estimated 9,887 households in the City of Brookings, SD)
Page 20
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
0%
45%36%27%26%21%17%15%14%13%11%11%10%8%7%7%7%6%5%4%4%4%4%4%4%3%3%2%2%2%2%2%
Walking/hiking trails
Paved bike trails
Natural areas & wildlife habitats
Small neighborhood parks
Large community parks
Indoor swimming pools/leisure pool
Outdoor swimming pools/splash pads
Indoor running/walking track
Golf courses
Indoor fitness & exercise facilities
Indoor basketball/volleyball/pickleball courts
Picnic areas & shelters
Playground equipment
Indoor field house sports fields
Off-leash dog parks
Sledding hill
Indoor playground
Multipurpose fields for practice & open play
Youth soccer fields
Community gardens
Disc golf courses
Camping
Youth baseball & softball fields
Outdoor ice-skating rinks
Pickleball courts
Mountain biking/single track
Outdoor tennis courts
Adult softball fields
Outdoor basketball courts
Skate parks
Youth football fields
Adult soccer fields
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%
Most Important 2nd Choice 3rd Choice 4th Choice
by percentage of households who selected the items as one of their top four choices
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
Q10. Facilities That Are Most Important to Households
Page 21
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q11. Households’ Need for Parks and Recreation Programs
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
52%
38%
35%
32%
31%
30%
29%
27%
25%
25%
25%
24%
21%
19%
19%
16%
16%
12%
12%
12%
11%
11%
8%
8%
8%
5%
Adult fitness & wellness programs
Nature programs
Canoeing & kayaking
Special events
Water fitness programs
Travel & tourism (day trips)
Youth & adult arts & crafts programs
Youth Learn to Swim programs
Senior programs
Outdoor adventure (camping, backpacking, etc.)
Youth sports programs
Active senior programs
Golf programs
Youth summer camp programs
Fishing programs
Youth fitness & wellness programs
Before & after school programs
Virtual/distance/online programs
Youth & adult drama/performing arts programs
Teens/tweens programs
Pre-school programs
Tennis lessons & leagues
Martial arts programs
Youth gymnastics & cheerleading
Inclusion services/therapeutic recreation
eSport gaming programs
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%
by percentage of respondents that responded “yes" to having a need (multiple choices could be selected)
Page 22
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Estimated Number of Households That Have a Need for Programs
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
5,151
3,777
3,480
3,134
3,065
2,956
2,838
2,630
2,492
2,492
2,422
2,333
2,056
1,898
1,829
1,582
1,532
1,186
1,186
1,147
1,078
1,048
821
781
751
484
Adult fitness & wellness programs
Nature programs
Canoeing & kayaking
Special events
Water fitness programs
Travel & tourism (day trips)
Youth & adult arts & crafts programs
Youth Learn to Swim programs
Senior programs
Outdoor adventure (camping, backpacking, etc.)
Youth sports programs
Active senior programs
Golf programs
Youth summer camp programs
Fishing programs
Youth fitness & wellness programs
Before & after school programs
Virtual/distance/online programs
Youth & adult drama/performing arts programs
Teens/tweens programs
Pre-school programs
Tennis lessons & leagues
Martial arts programs
Youth gymnastics & cheerleading
Inclusion services/therapeutic recreation
eSport gaming programs
by number of households (based on an estimated 9,887 households in the City of Brookings, SD)
Page 23
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
31%
16%
28%
29%
33%
21%
18%
22%
18%
11%
8%
17%
8%
9%
13%
8%
9%
7%
24%
13%
9%
9%
4%
2%
8%
5%
40%
47%
34%
31%
23%
33%
34%
26%
27%
31%
31%
22%
29%
27%
21%
25%
25%
26%
9%
18%
22%
18%
20%
14%
13%
28%
28%
13%
20%
26%
30%
33%
29%
41%
33%
30%
36%
22%
33%
30%
31%
23%
27%
32%
33%
16%
24%
32%
31%
15%
11%
7%
8%
16%
3%
12%
12%
14%
15%
7%
13%
18%
17%
16%
20%
19%
21%
26%
15%
20%
20%
20%
20%
18%
15%
20%
5%
2%
3%
11%
20%
7%
7%
5%
11%
11%
15%
13%
11%
27%
13%
18%
15%
18%
27%
17%
16%
38%
33%
34%
46%
60%
Before & after school programs
Youth sports programs
Golf programs
Pre-school programs
Youth gymnastics & cheerleading
Tennis lessons & leagues
Youth Learn to Swim programs
Canoeing & kayaking
Nature programs
Youth summer camp programs
Fishing programs
Outdoor adventure (camping, backpacking, etc.)
Special events
Youth & adult drama/performing arts programs
Adult fitness & wellness programs
Youth fitness & wellness programs
Senior programs
Youth & adult arts & crafts programs
Martial arts programs
Active senior programs
Teens/tweens programs
Virtual/distance/online programs
Water fitness programs
Travel & tourism (day trips)
Inclusion services/therapeutic recreation
eSport gaming programs
0%20%40%60%80%100%
100% Met 75% Met 50% Met 25% Met 0% Met
Q11. How Well Households’ Need for Programs Are Being Met
by percentage of respondents, using a 5-point scale, where 5 means “100% Met” and 1 means “0% Met”
Page 24
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
Estimated Number of Households Whose Need for Programs
Are Being Met 50% or Less
3,405
2,474
2,360
2,089
1,981
1,898
1,820
1,662
1,594
1,522
1,265
1,118
1,114
1,055
906
871
790
784
765
694
556
474
460
444
431
338
Adult fitness & wellness programs
Travel & tourism (day trips)
Water fitness programs
Nature programs
Special events
Youth & adult arts & crafts programs
Canoeing & kayaking
Senior programs
Active senior programs
Outdoor adventure (camping, backpacking, etc.)
Youth Learn to Swim programs
Fishing programs
Youth summer camp programs
Youth fitness & wellness programs
Youth sports programs
Virtual/distance/online programs
Teens/tweens programs
Golf programs
Youth & adult drama/performing arts programs
Inclusion services/therapeutic recreation
Martial arts programs
Tennis lessons & leagues
eSport gaming programs
Before & after school programs
Pre-school programs
Youth gymnastics & cheerleading
0 750 1,500 2,250 3,000 3,750 4,500
50% Met 25% Met 0% Met
by number of households (based on an estimated 9,887 households in the City of Brookings, SD)
Page 25
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
32%
21%
18%
16%
16%
14%
13%
13%
13%
12%
11%
11%
11%
8%
8%
6%
6%
5%
5%
4%
3%
3%
3%
3%
2%
1%
Adult fitness & wellness programs
Nature programs
Youth Learn to Swim programs
Water fitness programs
Special events
Active senior programs
Youth & adult arts & crafts programs
Youth sports programs
Senior programs
Canoeing & kayaking
Travel & tourism (day trips)
Outdoor adventure (camping, backpacking, etc.)
Golf programs
Youth summer camp programs
Before & after school programs
Fishing programs
Youth fitness & wellness programs
Pre-school programs
Teens/tweens programs
Youth & adult drama/performing arts programs
Virtual/distance/online programs
Inclusion services/therapeutic recreation
Youth gymnastics & cheerleading
Tennis lessons & leagues
eSport gaming programs
Martial arts programs
0%10%20%30%40%
Most Important 2nd Choice 3rd Choice 4th Choice
by percentage of households who selected the items as one of their top four choices
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
Q12. Programs That Are Most Important to Households
Page 26
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
58%
48%
48%
53%
54%
40%
38%
37%
41%
25%
40%
35%
29%
24%
16%
19%
19%
10%
13%
14%
6%
7%
24%
32%
32%
26%
23%
29%
30%
28%
24%
37%
22%
25%
27%
27%
33%
23%
23%
32%
28%
23%
14%
10%
4%
2%
5%
4%
8%
10%
10%
14%
15%
13%
18%
14%
21%
24%
24%
30%
29%
25%
26%
30%
40%
22%
14%
18%
16%
17%
16%
21%
22%
21%
20%
25%
21%
27%
23%
25%
27%
28%
29%
34%
33%
33%
41%
62%
Improve existing paved walking & biking trails
Improve existing small neighborhood parks
Improve existing large community parks
Improve existing nature preserves
Develop new trails that connect to existing trails
Improve existing nature center
Improve existing swimming pools
Develop sledding hill
Develop new indoor recreation center
Improve existing youth sports fields
Develop new indoor swimming pool
Acquire new park land
Replace aging outdoor swimming pool
Develop new splash parks
Develop new youth sports fields
Improve existing golf course
Develop new dog parks
Improve existing adult sports fields
Improve existing tennis court facilities
Develop new pickleball courts
Develop outdoor office space
Transfer HOA property to neighborhoods
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Very Supportive Somewhat Supportive Not Supportive Not Sure
Q13. Potential Actions That Brookings Parks Could Take to Improve
the Parks and Recreation System
by percentage of respondents using a 4-point scale, where 4 means “very supportive” and 1 means “not sure”
Page 27
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
1%
33%
29%
25%
23%
17%
14%
13%
12%
11%
10%
10%
8%
7%
7%
6%
6%
5%
4%
1%
1%
0%
Improve existing paved walking & biking trails
Develop new trails that connect to existing trails
Develop new indoor recreation center
Develop new indoor swimming pool
Improve existing nature preserves
Improve existing small neighborhood parks
Develop sledding hill
Improve existing youth sports fields
Improve existing large community parks
Improve existing nature center
Improve existing swimming pools
Acquire new park land
Improve existing golf course
Develop new dog parks
Replace aging outdoor swimming pool
Develop new splash parks
Develop new pickleball courts
Develop new youth sports fields
Improve existing tennis court facilities
Improve existing adult sports fields
Develop outdoor office space
Transfer HOA property to neighborhoods
0%10%20%30%40%
Most Important 2nd Choice 3rd Choice
by percentage of households who selected the items as one of their top three choices
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
Q14. Improvement Actions That Are Most Important to Households
Page 28
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
30%
33%
38%
31%
28%
19%
41%
35%
28%
33%
30%
34%
9%
7%
12%
14%
19%
11%
20%
25%
22%
22%
23%
36%
Program user fees for recreational programs
Hotel tax
Bond issue approved by voters
Dedicated tax for park improvements
Impact/development fees
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Very Supportive Somewhat Supportive Not Supportive Not Sure
Q15. Level of Support Households Have for Potential Funding Mechanisms
That Could be Used to Pay for the Improvement Actions
by percentage of respondents using a 4-point scale, where 4 means “very supportive” and 1 means “not sure”
Enterprise operations (concession stands, gift
shops, etc.)
Page 29
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
41%
39%
38%
38%
32%
16%
Hotel tax
Program user fees for recreational programs
Bond issue approved by voters
Dedicated tax for park improvements
Impact/development fees
0%10%20%30%40%
Most Support 2nd Choice 3rd Choice
by percentage of households who selected the items as one of their top three choices
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
Q16. Funding Mechanisms Households Most Support
Enterprise operations (concession stands, gift
shops, etc.)
Page 30
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
$27.69$21.53
$14.50
$12.89 $12.54
$10.84
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
Q17. If you had a budget of $100, how would you allocate the funds among
the categories of funding listed below?
by percentage of respondents
Develop indoor facilities
(multigenerational recreation center,
running/walking track, indoor
playgrounds, sports fields, etc.)
Construct new walking &
biking trails & improve
existing trails where needed
Improve existing
neighborhood &
community parks
(playgrounds, shelters, etc.)
Improve existing outdoor facilities
(sports fields, water park, etc.)
Acquire new parkland &
open space for parks
Develop additional
outdoor facilities
(sports fields, spray park,
etc.)
Page 31
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
34%
25%
26%
32%
35%
19%
20%
20%
26%
20%
21%
21%
12%
16%
14%
14%
6%
46%
48%
45%
36%
30%
45%
43%
43%
35%
39%
35%
33%
41%
33%
31%
29%
15%
14%
24%
21%
27%
31%
23%
24%
28%
34%
33%
37%
34%
25%
39%
43%
37%
29%
5%
3%
7%
4%
3%
11%
10%
8%
3%
7%
6%
9%
20%
10%
8%
17%
29%
2%
1%
1%
1%
0%
2%
2%
1%
2%
2%
2%
4%
3%
2%
3%
4%
22%
Maintenance of parks/facilities
Overall quality of sports fields
Amount of open greenspace
Customer assistance by staff
Quality/number of outdoor amenities
Amount of developed parkland
Ease of contacting City staff
Ease of registering for programs
Fees charged for recreation programs
Park/facility rule awareness & enforcement
Connectivity of trails & pathways
Ease of renting shelters, gyms, or meeting rooms
User friendliness of website
Shelter, gym, or meeting room rental availability
Amount of available indoor recreation space
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Very Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Neutral Somewhat Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied
Q18. Satisfaction With Parks and Recreation Services
by percentage of respondents using a 5-point scale, where 5 means “very satisfied” and 1 means “very dissatisfied”
(without “don’t know”)
Park & facility accessibility (ADA compliant access)
Availability of information about programs &
facilities
Page 32
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
40%
33%
22%
19%
16%
13%
11%
8%
8%
8%
6%
6%
5%
5%
3%
2%
1%
Amount of available indoor recreation space
Connectivity of trails & pathways
Maintenance of parks/facilities
Quality/number of outdoor amenities
Amount of developed parkland
Amount of open greenspace
Fees charged for recreation programs
Overall quality of sports fields
Shelter, gym, or meeting room rental availability
Park/facility rule awareness & enforcement
Ease of registering for programs
User friendliness of website
Ease of renting shelters, gyms, or meeting rooms
Customer assistance by staff
Ease of contacting City staff
0%10%20%30%40%
Most Attention 2nd Choice 3rd Choice
by percentage of households who selected the items as one of their top three choices
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
Q19. Parks and Recreation Services Residents Think Should Receive the Most
Attention from Brookings Over the Next Five Years
Availability of information about programs &
facilities
Park & facility accessibility (ADA compliant access)
Page 33
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
7%
10%
9%5%3%
10%
14%
13%
14%
10%
5%
Under age 5
Ages 5-9
Ages 10-14
Ages 15-19
Ages 20-24
Ages 25-34
Ages 35-44
Ages 45-54
Ages 55-64
Ages 65-74
Ages 75+
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
by percentage of respondents
Demographics: Q20. Counting yourself, how many people in your household are...
Page 34
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
15%
13%10%
11%
15%
36%
0-5 years
6-10 years
11-15 years
16-20 years
21-30 years
31 years or longer
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
by percentage of respondents (without “not provided")
Demographics: Q21. How many years have you lived in the City of Brookings?
Page 35
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
20%
21%
20%
20%
19%
18-34 years
35-44 years
45-54 years
55-64 years
65 years or older
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
by percentage of respondents (without “not provided")
Demographics: Q22. What is your age?
Page 36
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
49%
50%
0%
Male
Female
Non-binary (0.2%)
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
by percentage of respondents (without “not provided")
Demographics: Q23. Your gender:
Page 37
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
10%
13%21%
17%
14%10%
15%
Under $25K
$25K to $49,999
$50K to $74,999
$75K to $99,999
$100K to $149,999
$150K+
Not Provided
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
by percentage of respondents
Demographics: Q25. What is your total annual household income?
Page 38
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Demographics: Q24. Which of the following best describes your race/ethnicity?
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
91%
3%
1%
1%
1%
1%
White/Caucasian
Asian/Pacific Islander
African American/Black
Native American/Eskimo
Hispanic/Latino/Spanish
Other
0%20%40%60%80%100%
by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be selected)
Page 39
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Benchmark Analysis
Page 40
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Since 1998, ETC Institute has conducted household surveys for needs assessments, feasibility studies, customer
satisfaction, fees and charges comparisons, and other parks and recreation issues in more than 400
communities in 49 states across the country.
The results of these surveys have provided an unparalleled data base of information to compare responses from
household residents in client communities to “National Averages” and therefore provide a unique tool to “assist
organizations in better decision making.”
Communities within the data base include a full range of municipal and county governments from 20,000 in
population through over 1 million in population. They include communities in warm weather climates and cold
weather climates, mature communities and some of the fastest growing cities and counties in the country.
“National Averages” have been developed for numerous strategically important parks and recreation planning
and management issues including: customer satisfaction and usage of parks and programs; methods for receiving
marketing information; reasons that prevent members of households from using parks and recreation facilities
more often; priority recreation programs, parks, facilities and trails to improve or develop; priority programming
spaces to have in planned community centers and aquatic facilities; potential attendance for planned indoor
community centers and outdoor aquatic centers; etc.
Results from household responses for the City of Brookings (SD) were compared to National Benchmarks to gain
further strategic information. Graphs of all tabular comparisons are on the following pages.
Not The benchmarking data contained in this report is protected intellectual property. Any reproduction of the
benchmarking information in this report by persons or organizations not directly affiliated with the City of
Brookings, South Dakota is not authorized without written consent from ETC Institute.
Page 41
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Usage of Parks and Recreation Facilities and Parks
City of Brookings, SD vs. National Average
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
by percentage of respondents
86%
79%
0%20%40%60%80%100%
City of Brookings National Average
% of households who have visited
parks and recreation facilities
operated by local governments in
their community during the past year
Page 42
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Overall Ratings for Parks
City of Brookings, SD vs. National Average
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
by percentage of respondents (without "don’t know”)
39%
92%
29%
84%
0%20%40%60%80%100%
City of Brookings National Average
% of residents who would you rate the
quality of all the parks they've visited as
Excellent
% of residents who would you rate the
quality of all the parks they've visited as
Excellent or Good
Page 43
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Parks and Recreation Program Participation
City of Brookings, SD vs. National Average
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
by percentage of respondents
30%
32%
0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%
City of Brookings National Average
% of households that have
participated in City of Brookings
Park and Recreation programs
during the past year
Page 44
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Overall Ratings of Programs
City of Brookings, SD vs. National Average
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
by percentage of respondents (without “don’t know”)
29%
89%
22%
80%
0%20%40%60%80%100%
City of Brookings National Average
% of respondents who rate the quality of
all the recreation programs they've
participated in as Excellent
% of respondents who rate the quality
of all the recreation programs they've
participated in as Excellent or Good
Page 45
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Households with Needs for Sports Facilities
City of Brookings, SD vs. National Average
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
by percentage of respondents with a need for sports facilities
36%
26%
25%
21%
19%
17%
17%
13%
10%
24%
21%
21%
13%
22%
18%
23%
10%
11%
Golf courses
Multipurpose fields for practice & open play
Indoor basketball/volleyball/pickleball courts
Disc golf courses
Outdoor tennis courts
Youth baseball & softball fields
Outdoor ice-skating rinks
Pickleball courts
Skate parks
0%10%20%30%40%
City of Brookings National Average
Page 46
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Households with Needs for Other Recreation Facilities
City of Brookings, SD vs. National Average
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
by percentage of respondents with a need for other recreation facilities
69%
66%
50%
44%
44%
41%
25%
70%
48%
40%
39%
38%
40%
30%
Paved bike trails
Picnic areas & shelters
Outdoor swimming pools/splash pads
Indoor swimming pools/leisure pool
Indoor running/walking track
Playground equipment
Off-leash dog parks
0%20%40%60%80%
City of Brookings National Average
Page 47
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
81%
72%
71%
70%
43%
34%
25%
20%
16%
53%
54%
54%
52%
28%
30%
21%
22%
14%
Walking/hiking trails
Small neighborhood parks
Natural areas & wildlife habitats
Large community parks
Indoor fitness & exercise facilities
Community gardens
Outdoor basketball courts
Mountain biking/single track
Indoor field house sports fields
0%20%40%60%80%100%
City of Brookings National Average
Households with Needs for Other Recreation Facilities
City of Brookings, SD vs. National Average
by percentage of respondents with a need for other recreation facilities
Page 48
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Households with Needs for Other Recreation Programs
City of Brookings, SD vs. National Average
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
by percentage of respondents with a need for other recreation programs
52%
38%
32%
30%
27%
24%
19%
16%
11%
8%
8%
5%
49%
31%
39%
18%
23%
28%
19%
16%
15%
14%
14%
9%
Adult fitness & wellness programs
Nature programs
Special events
Travel & tourism (day trips)
Youth Learn to Swim programs
Active senior programs
Youth summer camp programs
Before & after school programs
Tennis lessons & leagues
Martial arts programs
Youth gymnastics & cheerleading
eSport gaming programs
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%
City of Brookings National Average
Page 49
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
31%
29%
25%
21%
12%
11%
27%
16%
18%
17%
15%
13%
Water fitness programs
Youth & adult arts & crafts programs
Youth sports programs
Golf programs
Teens/tweens programs
Pre-school programs
0%5%10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
City of Brookings National Average
Households with Needs for Other Recreation Programs
City of Brookings, SD vs. National Average
by percentage of respondents with a need for other recreation programs
Page 50
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Organizations Used for Parks and Recreation Programs and Facilities
City of Brooings, SD vs. National Average
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
by percentage of respondents who reported using the organization
57%
44%
38%
30%
28%
22%
17%
15%
12%
7%
46%
27%
16%
27%
39%
14%
22%
47%
4%
14%
Brookings Parks, & Forestry Dept.
Churches
South Dakota State University
School districts
South Dakota State Recreation Areas
Youth sports associations
Private clubs (tennis, fitness & dance)
Neighboring communities
Boys & Girls Club
Homeowners associations/apartment complex
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%
City of Brookings National Average
Page 51
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Method of Accessing Information About Recreation
Programs and Activities
City of Brookings, SD vs. National Average
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
by percentage of respondents
56%
47%
44%
40%
39%
22%
16%
3%
47%
32%
35%
43%
24%
8%
21%
18%
From friends & neighbors
Newspaper articles
Website
Department program guide
Facebook
At parks & facilities
School flyers/newsletters
Monthly eNewsletter
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%
City of Brookings National Average
Page 52
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Reasons Preventing the Use of Parks and Recreation Facilities and Programs
City of Brookings, SD vs. National Average
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
by percentage of respondents
24%
19%
15%
12%
9%
7%
7%
5%
4%
4%
4%
4%
4%
3%
3%
2%
1%
1%
0%
34%
31%
17%
17%
5%
14%
8%
14%
10%
10%
10%
3%
9%
4%
7%
12%
13%
10%
3%
I do not know what is being offered
We are too busy
Program or facility not offered
Program times are not convenient
Class full
Fees are too high
Facility operating hours not convenient
I do not know locations of facilities
Use services of other agencies
Lack of quality programs
Facilities are not well maintained
Registration for programs is difficult
Facilities do not have right equipment
Lack of accessibility
Lack of parking
Use facilities in other communities
Too far from our residence
Security is insufficient
Poor customer service by staff
0%10%20%30%40%
City of Brookings National Average
Page 53
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Priority Investment
Rating Analysis
Page 54
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
The Priority Investment Rating (PIR) was developed by ETC Institute to provide governments with an objective
tool for evaluating the priority that should be placed on parks and recreation investments. The Priority
Investment Rating was developed by ETC Institute to identify the facilities/amenities and programs residents
think should receive the highest priority for investment. The Priority Investment Rating reflects the importance
residents place on items (sum of top 4 choices) and the unmet needs (needs that are only being met 50% or
less). Since decisions related to future investments should consider both the level of unmet need and the
importance of facilities/amenities and programs, the PIR weights each of these components equally.
The Priority Investment Rating (PIR) reflects the sum of the Unmet Needs Rating (UNR) and the Importance
Rating (IR) as shown in the equation below:
PIR = UNR + IR
For example, suppose the Unmet Needs Rating for camping is 47.2 (out of 100) and the Importance Rating for
camping is 9.3 (out of 100), therefore the Priority Investment Rating for camping is 56.5 (out of 200).
How to Analyze the Charts:
High Priority Areas are those with a PIR of at least 100. A rating of 100 or above generally indicates
there is a relatively high level of unmet need and residents generally think it is important to fund
improvements in these areas. Improvements in this area are likely to have a positive impact on the
greatest number of households.
Medium Priority Areas are those with a PIR of 50-99. A rating in this range generally indicates there is
a medium to high level of unmet need or a significant percentage of residents generally think it is
important to fund improvements in these areas.
Low Priority Areas are those with a PIR below 50. A rating in this range generally indicates there is a
relatively low level of unmet need and residents do not think it is important to fund improvements in
these areas. Improvements may be warranted if the needs of very specialized populations are being
targeted.
The following pages show the Unmet Needs Rating, Importance Rating, and Priority Investment Rating (PIR)
for parks and recreation facilities and programs.
Page 55
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
100.0
88.4
80.3
69.6
55.7
51.3
49.1
47.2
47.2
39.8
39.0
35.2
34.6
31.5
31.2
29.0
28.6
25.8
25.2
23.5
17.9
17.2
17.1
15.7
15.0
14.8
14.0
11.6
10.8
7.5
4.1
3.4
Indoor swimming pools/leisure pool
Indoor running/walking track
Sledding hill
Indoor fitness & exercise facilities
Walking/hiking trails
Indoor basketball/volleyball/pickleball courts
Natural areas & wildlife habitats
Indoor playground
Camping
Small neighborhood parks
Off-leash dog parks
Paved bike trails
Large community parks
Outdoor swimming pools/splash pads
Picnic areas & shelters
Indoor field house sports fields
Community gardens
Outdoor ice-skating rinks
Multipurpose fields for practice & open play
Pickleball courts
Outdoor basketball courts
Mountain biking/single track
Playground equipment
Golf courses
Youth baseball & softball fields
Outdoor tennis courts
Youth football fields
Disc golf courses
Skate parks
Youth soccer fields
Adult soccer fields
Adult softball fields
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0
Unmet Needs Rating for Parks and Recreation Facilities
the rating for the item with the most unmet need=100
the rating of all other items reflects the relative amount of unmet need for each item compared to the item with the most unmet need
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
4.1
3.4
Page 56
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
100.0
79.5
59.5
57.9
45.6
36.6
32.6
31.1
29.5
24.7
24.0
22.2
18.1
14.8
14.3
14.3
13.2
10.4
9.7
9.7
9.3
9.3
8.4
8.4
7.0
6.6
5.3
4.2
4.0
4.0
3.5
0.4
Walking/hiking trails
Paved bike trails
Natural areas & wildlife habitats
Small neighborhood parks
Large community parks
Indoor swimming pools/leisure pool
Outdoor swimming pools/splash pads
Indoor running/walking track
Golf courses
Indoor fitness & exercise facilities
Indoor basketball/volleyball/pickleball courts
Picnic areas & shelters
Playground equipment
Indoor field house sports fields
Off-leash dog parks
Sledding hill
Indoor playground
Multipurpose fields for practice & open play
Youth soccer fields
Community gardens
Disc golf courses
Camping
Youth baseball & softball fields
Outdoor ice-skating rinks
Pickleball courts
Mountain biking/single track
Outdoor tennis courts
Adult softball fields
Outdoor basketball courts
Skate parks
Youth football fields
Adult soccer fields
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0
Importance Rating for Parks and Recreation Facilities
the rating for the item with the most unmet need=100
the rating of all other items reflects the relative amount of unmet need for each item compared to the item with the most unmet need
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
4.2
3.5
4.0
4.0
0.4
Page 57
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Top Priorities for Investment for Parks and Recreation Facilities
Based on the Priority Investment Rating (PIR)
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
155.7
136.6
119.5
114.7
108.6
97.8
94.6
94.3
80.2
75.3
64.1
60.4
56.5
53.5
53.3
45.2
43.8
38.3
35.5
35.1
34.2
30.5
23.8
23.3
21.9
20.8
20.1
17.5
17.2
14.8
Walking/hiking trails
Indoor swimming pools/leisure pool
Indoor running/walking track
Paved bike trails
Natural areas & wildlife habitats
Small neighborhood parks
Sledding hill
Indoor fitness & exercise facilities
Large community parks
Indoor basketball/volleyball/pickleball courts
Outdoor swimming pools/splash pads
Indoor playground
Camping
Picnic areas & shelters
Off-leash dog parks
Golf courses
Indoor field house sports fields
Community gardens
Multipurpose fields for practice & open play
Playground equipment
Outdoor ice-skating rinks
Pickleball courts
Mountain biking/single track
Youth baseball & softball fields
Outdoor basketball courts
Disc golf courses
Outdoor tennis courts
Youth football fields
Youth soccer fields
Skate parks
Adult softball fields
Adult soccer fields
0.0 40.0 80.0 120.0 160.0 200.0
High Priority (100+)
Medium Priority (50-99)
Low Priority (0-49)
7.6
4.5
Page 58
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
100.0
72.7
69.3
61.3
58.2
55.8
53.5
48.8
46.8
44.7
37.2
32.8
32.7
31.0
26.6
25.6
23.2
23.0
22.5
20.4
16.3
13.9
13.5
13.1
12.7
9.9
Adult fitness & wellness programs
Travel & tourism (day trips)
Water fitness programs
Nature programs
Special events
Youth & adult arts & crafts programs
Canoeing & kayaking
Senior programs
Active senior programs
Outdoor adventure (camping, backpacking, etc.)
Youth Learn to Swim programs
Fishing programs
Youth summer camp programs
Youth fitness & wellness programs
Youth sports programs
Virtual/distance/online programs
Teens/tweens programs
Golf programs
Youth & adult drama/performing arts programs
Inclusion services/therapeutic recreation
Martial arts programs
Tennis lessons & leagues
eSport gaming programs
Before & after school programs
Pre-school programs
Youth gymnastics & cheerleading
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0
Unmet Needs Rating for Parks and Recreation Programs
the rating for the item with the most unmet need=100
the rating of all other items reflects the relative amount of unmet need for each item compared to the item with the most unmet need
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
Page 59
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
100.0
65.6
57.7
49.8
49.5
42.9
42.3
41.0
39.4
39.1
35.0
33.4
33.4
25.6
24.3
20.2
18.3
15.5
14.5
12.0
10.7
10.4
8.8
8.8
6.6
3.8
Adult fitness & wellness programs
Nature programs
Youth Learn to Swim programs
Water fitness programs
Special events
Active senior programs
Youth & adult arts & crafts programs
Youth sports programs
Senior programs
Canoeing & kayaking
Travel & tourism (day trips)
Outdoor adventure (camping, backpacking, etc.)
Golf programs
Youth summer camp programs
Before & after school programs
Fishing programs
Youth fitness & wellness programs
Pre-school programs
Teens/tweens programs
Youth & adult drama/performing arts programs
Virtual/distance/online programs
Inclusion services/therapeutic recreation
Youth gymnastics & cheerleading
Tennis lessons & leagues
eSport gaming programs
Martial arts programs
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0
Importance Rating for Parks and Recreation Programs
the rating for the item with the most unmet need=100
the rating of all other items reflects the relative amount of unmet need for each item compared to the item with the most unmet need
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
3.8
Page 60
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Top Priorities for Investment for Parks and Recreation Programs
Based on the Priority Investment Rating (PIR)
Source: ETC Institute (2021)
200.0
127.0
119.2
107.7
107.7
98.0
94.9
92.6
89.7
88.2
78.1
67.6
58.3
56.5
53.0
49.3
37.7
37.3
36.3
34.5
30.8
28.1
22.7
20.1
20.1
18.8
Adult fitness & wellness programs
Nature programs
Water fitness programs
Special events
Travel & tourism (day trips)
Youth & adult arts & crafts programs
Youth Learn to Swim programs
Canoeing & kayaking
Active senior programs
Senior programs
Outdoor adventure (camping, backpacking, etc.)
Youth sports programs
Youth summer camp programs
Golf programs
Fishing programs
Youth fitness & wellness programs
Teens/tweens programs
Before & after school programs
Virtual/distance/online programs
Youth & adult drama/performing arts programs
Inclusion services/therapeutic recreation
Pre-school programs
Tennis lessons & leagues
eSport gaming programs
Martial arts programs
Youth gymnastics & cheerleading
0.0 40.0 80.0 120.0 160.0 200.0
High Priority (100+)
Medium Priority (50-99)
Low Priority (0-49)
Page 61
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Tabular Data
Page 62
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q1. In the last 12 months, have you or other members of your household used any parks or facilities
offered by the Brookings Parks, Recreation and Forestry Department?
Q1. Have you used any parks or facilities offered by Parks, Recreation & Forestry
Department in last 12 months? Number Percent
Yes 373 86.3%
No 59 13.7%
Total 432 100.0%
Q1a. How would you rate the overall quality of parks or facilities that you and members of your
household have used? Q1a. How would you rate overall quality of parks or facilities you have
used? Number Percent
Excellent 147 39.4%
Good 195 52.3%
Fair 29 7.8%
Poor 2 0.5%
Total 373 100.0%
Q2. In the last 24 months, have you or other members of your household participated in any recreation
programs offered by the Parks, Recreation and Forestry Department? Q2. Have you participated in any recreation programs offered by Parks,
Recreation & Forestry Department in last 24 months? Number Percent
Yes 130 30.1%
No 302 69.9%
Total 432 100.0%
Q2a. How would you rate the overall quality of programs that you and members of your household have
participated in? Q2a. How would you rate overall quality of programs you have participated
in? Number Percent
Excellent 37 28.5%
Good 78 60.0%
Fair 15 11.5%
Total 130 100.0%
Page 63
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q3. From the following list, please CHECK ALL of the organizations that you and members of your household
have used for indoor and outdoor recreation activities during the last 12 months.
Q3. All organizations you have used for indoor & outdoor
recreation activities during last 12 months: Number Percent
Boys & Girls Club 53 12.3 %
School districts 131 30.3 %
Youth sports associations 96 22.2 %
Churches 188 43.5 %
Neighboring communities 65 15.0 %
Brookings Parks, & Forestry Dept. 248 57.4 %
Private clubs (tennis, fitness & dance) 74 17.1 %
South Dakota State Recreation Areas 120 27.8 %
South Dakota State University 162 37.5 %
Homeowners associations/apartment complex 32 7.4 %
Travel sports teams 54 12.5 %
None. Do not use any organizations 49 11.3 %
Total 1272
WITHOUT “NONE”
Q3. From the following list, please CHECK ALL of the organizations that you and members of your household
have used for indoor and outdoor recreation activities during the last 12 months. (without "none")
Q3. All organizations you have used for indoor & outdoor
recreation activities during last 12 months: Number Percent
Boys & Girls Club 53 13.8 %
School districts 131 34.2 %
Youth sports associations 96 25.1 %
Churches 188 49.1 %
Neighboring communities 65 17.0 %
Brookings Parks, & Forestry Dept. 248 64.8 %
Private clubs (tennis, fitness & dance) 74 19.3 %
South Dakota State Recreation Areas 120 31.3 %
South Dakota State University 162 42.3 %
Homeowners associations/apartment complex 32 8.4 %
Travel sports teams 54 14.1 %
Total 1223
Page 64
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q4. Please CHECK ALL the ways you learn about Brookings Parks, Recreation, and Forestry Department
programs and services.
Q4. All the ways you learn about Brookings Parks, Recreation, &
Forestry Department programs & services: Number Percent
Department program guide 174 40.3 %
Website 192 44.4 %
Newspaper articles 203 47.0 %
Radio 126 29.2 %
Cable access television 29 6.7 %
At parks & facilities 95 22.0 %
From friends & neighbors 242 56.0 %
School flyers/newsletters 70 16.2 %
Monthly eNewsletter 14 3.2 %
Department staff 17 3.9 %
Facebook 168 38.9 %
Twitter 10 2.3 %
Instagram 12 2.8 %
NextDoor 11 2.5 %
Other 11 2.5 %
Total 1374
Q4-15. Other
Q4-15. Other Number Percent
Mail 4 36.4 %
Grandchildren 1 9.1 %
SDSU Wellness Center announcements over the intercom 1 9.1 %
When we got this survey 1 9.1 %
Being involved in the past 1 9.1 %
Drive by and historic use before Covid 1 9.1 %
I would like email 1 9.1 %
General awareness 1 9.1 %
Total 11 100.0 %
Page 65
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q5. What are your preferred ways to learn about programs and services?
Q5. Top choice Number Percent
Department program guide 80 18.5 %
Website 60 13.9 %
Newspaper articles 80 18.5 %
Radio 10 2.3 %
Cable access television 2 0.5 %
At parks & facilities 13 3.0 %
From friends & neighbors 16 3.7 %
School flyers/newsletters 4 0.9 %
Monthly eNewsletter 22 5.1 %
Department staff 2 0.5 %
Facebook 67 15.5 %
Twitter 2 0.5 %
Instagram 3 0.7 %
Other 5 1.2 %
None chosen 66 15.3 %
Total 432 100.0 %
Q5. What are your preferred ways to learn about programs and services?
Q5. 2nd choice Number Percent
Department program guide 41 9.5 %
Website 73 16.9 %
Newspaper articles 39 9.0 %
Radio 41 9.5 %
Cable access television 3 0.7 %
At parks & facilities 18 4.2 %
From friends & neighbors 37 8.6 %
School flyers/newsletters 17 3.9 %
Monthly eNewsletter 13 3.0 %
Facebook 52 12.0 %
Instagram 4 0.9 %
Other 2 0.5 %
None chosen 92 21.3 %
Total 432 100.0 %
Page 66
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q5. What are your preferred ways to learn about programs and services?
Q5. 3rd choice Number Percent
Department program guide 31 7.2 %
Website 45 10.4 %
Newspaper articles 29 6.7 %
Radio 20 4.6 %
Cable access television 8 1.9 %
At parks & facilities 14 3.2 %
From friends & neighbors 47 10.9 %
School flyers/newsletters 25 5.8 %
Monthly eNewsletter 12 2.8 %
Department staff 4 0.9 %
Facebook 27 6.3 %
Twitter 8 1.9 %
Instagram 7 1.6 %
NextDoor 1 0.2 %
Other 2 0.5 %
None chosen 152 35.2 %
Total 432 100.0 %
SUM OF THE TOP THREE CHOICES
Q5. What are your preferred ways to learn about programs and services? (top 3)
Q5. Sum of the top three choices Number Percent
Department program guide 152 35.2 %
Website 178 41.2 %
Newspaper articles 148 34.3 %
Radio 71 16.4 %
Cable access television 13 3.0 %
At parks & facilities 45 10.4 %
From friends & neighbors 100 23.1 %
School flyers/newsletters 46 10.6 %
Monthly eNewsletter 47 10.9 %
Department staff 6 1.4 %
Facebook 146 33.8 %
Twitter 10 2.3 %
Instagram 14 3.2 %
NextDoor 1 0.2 %
Other 9 2.1 %
None chosen 66 15.3 %
Total 1052
Page 67
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q6. Please CHECK ALL the reasons that deter you or other members of your household from using parks,
recreation facilities or programs of Brookings Parks, Recreation and Forestry more often.
Q6. All reasons that deter you from using parks, recreation
facilities or programs of Parks, Recreation & Forestry more often: Number Percent
Facilities are not well maintained 19 4.4 %
Program or facility not offered 63 14.6 %
We are too busy 81 18.8 %
Security is insufficient 3 0.7 %
Lack of quality programs 19 4.4 %
Too far from our residence 5 1.2 %
Class full 39 9.0 %
Fees are too high 32 7.4 %
Program times are not convenient 52 12.0 %
Use facilities in other communities 7 1.6 %
Poor customer service by staff 1 0.2 %
I do not know locations of facilities 20 4.6 %
Facilities do not have right equipment 15 3.5 %
Language barriers are difficult 1 0.2 %
I do not know what is being offered 105 24.3 %
Facility operating hours not convenient 29 6.7 %
Registration for programs is difficult 16 3.7 %
Lack of parking 11 2.5 %
Use services of other agencies 19 4.4 %
Lack of accessibility 13 3.0 %
Nothing deters me from participating 118 27.3 %
None. I do not use facilities 36 8.3 %
Total 704
Page 68
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
WITHOUT “NONE”
Q6. Please CHECK ALL the reasons that deter you or other members of your household from using parks,
recreation facilities or programs of Brookings Parks, Recreation and Forestry more often. (without "none")
Q6. All reasons that deter you from using parks, recreation
facilities or programs of Parks, Recreation & Forestry more often Number Percent
Facilities are not well maintained 19 4.8 %
Program or facility not offered 63 15.9 %
We are too busy 81 20.5 %
Security is insufficient 3 0.8 %
Lack of quality programs 19 4.8 %
Too far from our residence 5 1.3 %
Class full 39 9.8 %
Fees are too high 32 8.1 %
Program times are not convenient 52 13.1 %
Use facilities in other communities 7 1.8 %
Poor customer service by staff 1 0.3 %
I do not know locations of facilities 20 5.1 %
Facilities do not have right equipment 15 3.8 %
Language barriers are difficult 1 0.3 %
I do not know what is being offered 105 26.5 %
Facility operating hours not convenient 29 7.3 %
Registration for programs is difficult 16 4.0 %
Lack of parking 11 2.8 %
Use services of other agencies 19 4.8 %
Lack of accessibility 13 3.3 %
Nothing deters me from participating 118 29.8 %
Total 668
Page 69
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q7. The costs to provide recreation programs are funded through a combination of participant fees and
general tax revenues. The following are categories of programs offered by Brookings Parks, Recreation and
Forestry Dept. For each program category, please indicate what percent of the program costs should be
paid by taxes and what percent by user fees. (N=432)
100% taxes/
0% fees
75% taxes/
25% fees
50% taxes/
50% fees
25% taxes/
75% fees
0% taxes/
100% fees
Don't
Know
Q7-1. Youth sports programs 12.5% 23.6% 29.2% 8.6% 6.9% 19.2%
Q7-2. Adult sports programs 3.0% 8.3% 22.0% 23.6% 24.5% 18.5%
Q7-3. Youth camps 8.8% 18.3% 30.1% 14.6% 8.1% 20.1% Q7-4. Adult classes (exercise,
arts, dance, etc.) 3.0% 7.6% 19.4% 23.1% 26.4% 20.4%
Q7-5. Youth classes (arts, dance,
etc.) 9.5% 18.8% 31.3% 11.6% 7.9% 21.1%
Q7-6. Learn to swim programs 24.5% 20.1% 21.3% 7.9% 6.9% 19.2%
Q7-7. Senior adult classes 8.3% 15.7% 23.4% 18.1% 14.8% 19.7%
Q7-8. Special events & festivals 7.2% 10.9% 25.2% 19.9% 15.5% 21.3% Q7-9. Programs for low-income
residents 31.7% 24.5% 12.0% 8.1% 5.1% 18.5%
Q7-10. Programs for special
populations/disabled 40.3% 19.7% 12.0% 4.4% 4.4% 19.2%
Q7-11. Field rentals for youth
sports tournaments 7.4% 15.5% 26.2% 14.6% 15.3% 21.1%
Q7-12. Field rentals for adult
sports tournaments 4.2% 6.7% 17.6% 23.1% 28.0% 20.4%
Page 70
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW”
Q7. The costs to provide recreation programs are funded through a combination of participant fees and
general tax revenues. The following are categories of programs offered by Brookings Parks, Recreation and
Forestry Dept. For each program category, please indicate what percent of the program costs should be paid
by taxes and what percent by user fees. (without "don't know")
(N=432)
100% taxes/
0% fees
75% taxes/
25% fees
50% taxes/
50% fees
25% taxes/
75% fees
0% taxes/
100% fees
Q7-1. Youth sports programs 15.5% 29.2% 36.1% 10.6% 8.6%
Q7-2. Adult sports programs 3.7% 10.2% 27.0% 29.0% 30.1% Q7-3. Youth camps 11.0% 22.9% 37.7% 18.3% 10.1% Q7-4. Adult classes (exercise, arts,
dance, etc.) 3.8% 9.6% 24.4% 29.1% 33.1%
Q7-5. Youth classes (arts, dance, etc.) 12.0% 23.8% 39.6% 14.7% 10.0%
Q7-6. Learn to swim programs 30.4% 24.9% 26.4% 9.7% 8.6%
Q7-7. Senior adult classes 10.4% 19.6% 29.1% 22.5% 18.4%
Q7-8. Special events & festivals 9.1% 13.8% 32.1% 25.3% 19.7% Q7-9. Programs for low-income
residents 38.9% 30.1% 14.8% 9.9% 6.3%
Q7-10. Programs for special
populations/disabled 49.9% 24.4% 14.9% 5.4% 5.4%
Q7-11. Field rentals for youth sports
tournaments 9.4% 19.6% 33.1% 18.5% 19.4%
Q7-12. Field rentals for adult sports
tournaments 5.2% 8.4% 22.1% 29.1% 35.2%
Page 71
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q8. Please circle the time of day that members of your household would most prefer to use recreation
programs offered by Brookings Parks, Recreation and Forestry Department. Please select "N/A" if there is no
one in your household in that age group.
(N=432)
Morning Afternoon Evening Anytime N/A
Q8-1. Child (under age 6) 5.8% 5.1% 6.0% 5.3% 77.8%
Q8-2. Youth (ages 6-12) 4.4% 6.7% 7.4% 6.9% 74.5%
Q8-3. Teen (ages 13-17) 1.4% 4.9% 7.2% 5.8% 80.8% Q8-4. Adult (ages 18-59) 3.7% 4.4% 28.9% 16.9% 46.1%
Q8-5. Older adult (ages 60+) 13.9% 9.5% 7.6% 19.7% 49.3%
Q8-6. Family 2.8% 6.5% 21.8% 18.3% 50.7%
Page 72
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
WITHOUT “N/A”
Q8. Please circle the time of day that members of your household would most prefer to use recreation
programs offered by Brookings Parks, Recreation and Forestry Department. Please select "N/A" if there is no
one in your household in that age group. (without "N/A")
(N=432)
Morning Afternoon Evening Anytime
Q8-1. Child (under age 6) 26.0% 22.9% 27.1% 24.0%
Q8-2. Youth (ages 6-12) 17.3% 26.4% 29.1% 27.3%
Q8-3. Teen (ages 13-17) 7.2% 25.3% 37.3% 30.1% Q8-4. Adult (ages 18-59) 6.9% 8.2% 53.6% 31.3%
Q8-5. Older adult (ages 60+) 27.4% 18.7% 15.1% 38.8%
Q8-6. Family 5.6% 13.1% 44.1% 37.1%
Page 73
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q9. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need for each of the parks and recreational
facilities listed below.
(N=432)
Yes No
Q9-1. Youth soccer fields 17.1% 82.9% Q9-2. Youth baseball & softball fields 17.1% 82.9% Q9-3. Youth football fields 10.4% 89.6% Q9-4. Adult softball fields 9.0% 91.0% Q9-5. Adult soccer fields 4.4% 95.6% Q9-6. Multipurpose fields for practice & open play 25.9% 74.1% Q9-7. Small neighborhood parks 72.2% 27.8% Q9-8. Large community parks 70.4% 29.6% Q9-9. Off-leash dog parks 24.8% 75.2% Q9-10. Outdoor swimming pools/splash pads 49.8% 50.2% Q9-11. Playground equipment 41.4% 58.6% Q9-12. Outdoor basketball courts 24.5% 75.5% Q9-13. Outdoor tennis courts 19.2% 80.8% Q9-14. Outdoor ice-skating rinks 17.1% 82.9% Q9-15. Pickleball courts 13.0% 87.0% Q9-16. Paved bike trails 69.4% 30.6% Q9-17. Mountain biking/single track 19.7% 80.3% Q9-18. Walking/hiking trails 80.6% 19.4% Q9-19. Natural areas & wildlife habitats 71.1% 28.9% Q9-20. Picnic areas & shelters 66.4% 33.6% Q9-21. Skate parks 9.5% 90.5%
Q9-22. Golf courses 36.1% 63.9% Q9-23. Disc golf courses 21.1% 78.9% Q9-24. Community gardens 33.6% 66.4% Q9-25. Indoor field house sports fields (football, soccer,
etc.) 15.7% 84.3%
Q9-26. Indoor playground 19.9% 80.1% Q9-27. Indoor basketball/volleyball/pickleball courts 24.5% 75.5% Q9-28. Indoor fitness & exercise facilities 43.3% 56.7% Q9-29. Indoor running/walking track 44.4% 55.6% Q9-30. Indoor swimming pools/leisure pool 44.4% 55.6% Q9-31. Camping 28.2% 71.8% Q9-32. Sledding hill 37.7% 62.3% Q9-33. Other 3.7% 96.3%
Page 74
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q9. " If "Yes," please rate the recreation parks/facilities in your community using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5
means the needs of your household are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met."
(N=406)
100% Met 75% Met 50% Met 25% Met 0% Met
Q9-1. Youth soccer fields 59.7% 23.6% 8.3% 6.9% 1.4% Q9-2. Youth baseball & softball fields 55.1% 11.6% 23.2% 8.7% 1.4% Q9-3. Youth football fields 26.8% 22.0% 34.1% 17.1% 0.0% Q9-4. Adult softball fields 62.9% 22.9% 11.4% 2.9% 0.0% Q9-5. Adult soccer fields 47.1% 17.6% 23.5% 5.9% 5.9% Q9-6. Multipurpose fields for practice &
open play 36.1% 26.9% 15.7% 11.1% 10.2% Q9-7. Small neighborhood parks 50.3% 28.7% 15.2% 4.4% 1.4% Q9-8. Large community parks 54.0% 27.3% 14.2% 4.2% 0.3% Q9-9. Off-leash dog parks 20.6% 19.6% 30.4% 16.7% 12.7% Q9-10. Outdoor swimming pools/splash
pads 46.6% 29.4% 12.3% 6.4% 5.4% Q9-11. Playground equipment 52.4% 31.9% 13.3% 2.4% 0.0% Q9-12. Outdoor basketball courts 35.6% 36.5% 16.3% 11.5% 0.0% Q9-13. Outdoor tennis courts 46.3% 24.4% 15.9% 11.0% 2.4% Q9-14. Outdoor ice skating rinks 19.7% 22.7% 34.8% 10.6% 12.1% Q9-15. Pickleball courts 20.8% 10.4% 27.1% 20.8% 20.8% Q9-16. Paved bike trails 38.1% 42.7% 13.9% 4.3% 1.1% Q9-17. Mountain biking/single track 39.7% 26.9% 20.5% 7.7% 5.1% Q9-18. Walking/hiking trails 39.6% 34.0% 20.2% 5.2% 0.9% Q9-19. Natural areas & wildlife habitats 39.3% 34.4% 18.6% 6.3% 1.4% Q9-20. Picnic areas & shelters 51.9% 30.2% 14.9% 2.6% 0.4% Q9-21. Skate parks 18.9% 37.8% 24.3% 8.1% 10.8% Q9-22. Golf courses 50.7% 32.9% 14.5% 1.3% 0.7% Q9-23. Disc golf courses 46.5% 32.6% 17.4% 2.3% 1.2% Q9-24. Community gardens 47.1% 20.6% 19.9% 5.9% 6.6% Q9-25. Indoor field house sports fields
(football, soccer, etc.) 7.8% 21.9% 14.1% 23.4% 32.8% Q9-26. Indoor playground 6.1% 3.7% 6.1% 24.4% 59.8% Q9-27. Indoor
basketball/volleyball/pickleball courts 5.1% 15.3% 28.6% 26.5% 24.5% Q9-28. Indoor fitness & exercise facilities 19.4% 19.4% 16.5% 17.1% 27.6% Q9-29. Indoor running/walking track 13.0% 11.3% 15.3% 22.6% 37.9% Q9-30. Indoor swimming pools/leisure
pool 7.1% 7.1% 11.0% 23.1% 51.6% Q9-31. Camping 15.9% 20.4% 25.7% 21.2% 16.8% Q9-32. Sledding hill 7.2% 11.8% 12.4% 25.5% 43.1% Q9-33. Other 14.3% 14.3% 7.1% 7.1% 57.1%
Page 75
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q9-33. Other
Q9-33. Other Number Percent
Shooting range 2 12.5 %
Groomed cross country courses for skiing in the winter 1 6.3 %
Lighted dog park 1 6.3 %
Safe paved places to skateboard, longboard, roller skate and
roller blade 1 6.3 %
Cross country ski trail 1 6.3 %
Dance classes for adults 1 6.3 %
Indoor ice rink with weight room 1 6.3 %
Racquetball 1 6.3 %
Parking lots for reading 1 6.3 %
Pool for physical therapy 1 6.3 %
INDOOR ZERO ENTRY POOL FOR TODDLERS 1 6.3 %
Outdoor volleyball 1 6.3 %
Indoor tennis court 1 6.3 %
Cross country skiing 1 6.3 %
Country groomed trails 1 6.3 %
Total 16 100.0 %
Page 76
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q10. Which FOUR of the parks/facilities from the list in Question 9 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household?
Q10. Top choice Number Percent
Youth soccer fields 9 2.1 %
Youth baseball & softball fields 5 1.2 %
Youth football fields 1 0.2 %
Adult softball fields 2 0.5 %
Multipurpose fields for practice & open play 4 0.9 %
Small neighborhood parks 40 9.3 %
Large community parks 18 4.2 %
Off-leash dog parks 6 1.4 %
Outdoor swimming pools/splash pads 13 3.0 %
Playground equipment 8 1.9 %
Outdoor tennis courts 3 0.7 %
Outdoor ice-skating rinks 2 0.5 %
Pickleball courts 4 0.9 %
Paved bike trails 60 13.9 %
Mountain biking/single track 1 0.2 %
Walking/hiking trails 63 14.6 %
Natural areas & wildlife habitats 17 3.9 %
Picnic areas & shelters 6 1.4 %
Skate parks 1 0.2 %
Golf courses 16 3.7 %
Community gardens 6 1.4 %
Indoor field house sports fields (football, soccer, etc.) 13 3.0 %
Indoor playground 4 0.9 %
Indoor basketball/volleyball/pickleball courts 21 4.9 %
Indoor fitness & exercise facilities 8 1.9 %
Indoor running/walking track 10 2.3 %
Indoor swimming pools/leisure pool 23 5.3 %
Camping 4 0.9 %
Sledding hill 5 1.2 %
Other 7 1.6 %
None chosen 52 12.0 %
Total 432 100.0 %
Page 77
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q10. Which FOUR of the parks/facilities from the list in Question 9 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household?
Q10. 2nd choice Number Percent
Youth soccer fields 5 1.2 %
Youth baseball & softball fields 5 1.2 %
Youth football fields 3 0.7 %
Adult softball fields 1 0.2 %
Multipurpose fields for practice & open play 5 1.2 %
Small neighborhood parks 18 4.2 %
Large community parks 27 6.3 %
Off-leash dog parks 11 2.5 %
Outdoor swimming pools/splash pads 19 4.4 %
Playground equipment 12 2.8 %
Outdoor basketball courts 1 0.2 %
Outdoor tennis courts 2 0.5 %
Outdoor ice-skating rinks 4 0.9 %
Pickleball courts 5 1.2 %
Paved bike trails 41 9.5 %
Mountain biking/single track 6 1.4 %
Walking/hiking trails 63 14.6 %
Natural areas & wildlife habitats 36 8.3 %
Picnic areas & shelters 10 2.3 %
Skate parks 2 0.5 %
Golf courses 10 2.3 %
Disc golf courses 2 0.5 %
Community gardens 2 0.5 %
Indoor field house sports fields (football, soccer, etc.) 6 1.4 %
Indoor playground 6 1.4 %
Indoor basketball/volleyball/pickleball courts 14 3.2 %
Indoor fitness & exercise facilities 13 3.0 %
Indoor running/walking track 14 3.2 %
Indoor swimming pools/leisure pool 17 3.9 %
Camping 2 0.5 %
Sledding hill 5 1.2 %
Other 1 0.2 %
None chosen 64 14.8 %
Total 432 100.0 %
Page 78
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q10. Which FOUR of the parks/facilities from the list in Question 9 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household?
Q10. 3rd choice Number Percent
Youth soccer fields 4 0.9 %
Youth baseball & softball fields 3 0.7 %
Youth football fields 2 0.5 %
Adult softball fields 2 0.5 %
Adult soccer fields 1 0.2 %
Multipurpose fields for practice & open play 8 1.9 %
Small neighborhood parks 27 6.3 %
Large community parks 24 5.6 %
Off-leash dog parks 5 1.2 %
Outdoor swimming pools/splash pads 20 4.6 %
Playground equipment 7 1.6 %
Outdoor basketball courts 3 0.7 %
Outdoor tennis courts 3 0.7 %
Outdoor ice-skating rinks 5 1.2 %
Pickleball courts 4 0.9 %
Paved bike trails 29 6.7 %
Mountain biking/single track 3 0.7 %
Walking/hiking trails 42 9.7 %
Natural areas & wildlife habitats 34 7.9 %
Picnic areas & shelters 11 2.5 %
Skate parks 1 0.2 %
Golf courses 15 3.5 %
Disc golf courses 4 0.9 %
Community gardens 7 1.6 %
Indoor field house sports fields (football, soccer, etc.) 6 1.4 %
Indoor playground 7 1.6 %
Indoor basketball/volleyball/pickleball courts 4 0.9 %
Indoor fitness & exercise facilities 15 3.5 %
Indoor running/walking track 24 5.6 %
Indoor swimming pools/leisure pool 14 3.2 %
Camping 5 1.2 %
Sledding hill 7 1.6 %
Other 1 0.2 %
None chosen 85 19.7 %
Total 432 100.0 %
Page 79
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q10. Which FOUR of the parks/facilities from the list in Question 9 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household?
Q10. 4th choice Number Percent
Youth soccer fields 1 0.2 %
Youth baseball & softball fields 3 0.7 %
Youth football fields 1 0.2 %
Adult softball fields 3 0.7 %
Multipurpose fields for practice & open play 3 0.7 %
Small neighborhood parks 28 6.5 %
Large community parks 20 4.6 %
Off-leash dog parks 6 1.4 %
Outdoor swimming pools/splash pads 12 2.8 %
Playground equipment 8 1.9 %
Outdoor basketball courts 4 0.9 %
Outdoor tennis courts 2 0.5 %
Outdoor ice-skating rinks 5 1.2 %
Pickleball courts 1 0.2 %
Paved bike trails 26 6.0 %
Mountain biking/single track 3 0.7 %
Walking/hiking trails 28 6.5 %
Natural areas & wildlife habitats 30 6.9 %
Picnic areas & shelters 17 3.9 %
Skate parks 4 0.9 %
Golf courses 17 3.9 %
Disc golf courses 6 1.4 %
Community gardens 10 2.3 %
Indoor field house sports fields (football, soccer, etc.) 4 0.9 %
Indoor playground 9 2.1 %
Indoor basketball/volleyball/pickleball courts 8 1.9 %
Indoor fitness & exercise facilities 12 2.8 %
Indoor running/walking track 13 3.0 %
Indoor swimming pools/leisure pool 18 4.2 %
Camping 7 1.6 %
Sledding hill 11 2.5 %
Other 2 0.5 %
None chosen 110 25.5 %
Total 432 100.0 %
Page 80
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
SUM OF THE TOP FOUR CHOICES
Q10. Which FOUR of the parks/facilities from the list in Question 9 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household?
(top 4)
Q10. Sum of the top four choices Number Percent
Youth soccer fields 19 4.4 %
Youth baseball & softball fields 16 3.7 %
Youth football fields 7 1.6 %
Adult softball fields 8 1.9 %
Adult soccer fields 1 0.2 %
Multipurpose fields for practice & open play 20 4.6 %
Small neighborhood parks 113 26.2 %
Large community parks 89 20.6 %
Off-leash dog parks 28 6.5 %
Outdoor swimming pools/splash pads 64 14.8 %
Playground equipment 35 8.1 %
Outdoor basketball courts 8 1.9 %
Outdoor tennis courts 10 2.3 %
Outdoor ice-skating rinks 16 3.7 %
Pickleball courts 14 3.2 %
Paved bike trails 156 36.1 %
Mountain biking/single track 13 3.0 %
Walking/hiking trails 196 45.4 %
Natural areas & wildlife habitats 117 27.1 %
Picnic areas & shelters 44 10.2 %
Skate parks 8 1.9 %
Golf courses 58 13.4 %
Disc golf courses 12 2.8 %
Community gardens 25 5.8 %
Indoor field house sports fields (football, soccer, etc.) 29 6.7 %
Indoor playground 26 6.0 %
Indoor basketball/volleyball/pickleball courts 47 10.9 %
Indoor fitness & exercise facilities 48 11.1 %
Indoor running/walking track 61 14.1 %
Indoor swimming pools/leisure pool 72 16.7 %
Camping 18 4.2 %
Sledding hill 28 6.5 %
Other 11 2.5 %
None chosen 52 12.0 %
Total 1469
Page 81
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q11. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need for each of the recreation programs
listed below.
(N=432)
Yes No
Q11-1. Youth Learn to Swim programs 26.6% 73.4% Q11-2. Pre-school programs 10.9% 89.1% Q11-3. Before & after school programs 15.5% 84.5% Q11-4. Youth summer camp programs 19.2% 80.8% Q11-5. Youth sports programs 24.5% 75.5% Q11-6. Youth fitness & wellness programs 16.0% 84.0% Q11-7. eSport gaming programs 4.9% 95.1% Q11-8. Virtual/distance/online programs 12.0% 88.0% Q11-9. Teens/tweens programs 11.6% 88.4% Q11-10. Martial arts programs 8.3% 91.7% Q11-11. Adult fitness & wellness programs 52.1% 47.9% Q11-12. Water fitness programs 31.0% 69.0% Q11-13. Tennis lessons & leagues 10.6% 89.4% Q11-14. Youth gymnastics & cheerleading 7.9% 92.1% Q11-15. Senior programs (e.g., games, social, crafts) 25.2% 74.8% Q11-16. Active senior programs (e.g., pickleball, fitness) 23.6% 76.4% Q11-17. Youth & adult arts & crafts programs 28.7% 71.3% Q11-18. Youth & adult drama/performing arts programs 12.0% 88.0% Q11-19. Inclusion services/therapeutic recreation 7.6% 92.4% Q11-20. Special events 31.7% 68.3% Q11-21. Fishing programs 18.5% 81.5% Q11-22. Nature programs 38.2% 61.8% Q11-23. Golf programs 20.8% 79.2% Q11-24. Outdoor adventure (camping, backpacking, etc.) 25.2% 74.8% Q11-25. Canoeing & kayaking 35.2% 64.8% Q11-26. Travel & tourism (day trips) 29.9% 70.1% Q11-27. Other 1.6% 98.4%
Page 82
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q11. If "Yes," please rate the recreation programs in your community using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means
the needs of your household are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met."
(N=367)
100% Met 75% Met 50% Met 25% Met 0% Met
Q11-1. Youth Learn to Swim programs 17.6% 34.3% 29.6% 12.0% 6.5% Q11-2. Pre-school programs 28.9% 31.1% 13.3% 15.6% 11.1% Q11-3. Before & after school programs 30.6% 40.3% 12.9% 11.3% 4.8% Q11-4. Youth summer camp programs 10.7% 30.7% 41.3% 6.7% 10.7% Q11-5. Youth sports programs 16.2% 46.5% 28.3% 7.1% 2.0% Q11-6. Youth fitness & wellness programs 7.9% 25.4% 30.2% 19.0% 17.5% Q11-7. eSport gaming programs 5.0% 0.0% 15.0% 20.0% 60.0% Q11-8. Virtual/distance/online programs 8.9% 17.8% 15.6% 20.0% 37.8% Q11-9. Teens/tweens programs 8.9% 22.2% 33.3% 20.0% 15.6% Q11-10. Martial arts programs 23.5% 8.8% 26.5% 14.7% 26.5% Q11-11. Adult fitness & wellness programs 13.1% 20.8% 33.3% 19.7% 13.1% Q11-12. Water fitness programs 3.5% 19.5% 23.9% 20.4% 32.7% Q11-13. Tennis lessons & leagues 21.4% 33.3% 26.2% 11.9% 7.1% Q11-14. Youth gymnastics & cheerleading 33.3% 23.3% 20.0% 3.3% 20.0% Q11-15. Senior programs (e.g., games,
social, crafts) 8.6% 24.7% 30.9% 21.0% 14.8%
Q11-16. Active senior programs (e.g.,
pickleball, fitness) 13.4% 18.3% 31.7% 19.5% 17.1%
Q11-17. Youth & adult arts & crafts
programs 6.6% 26.4% 22.6% 26.4% 17.9%
Q11-18. Youth & adult drama/performing
arts programs 8.9% 26.7% 22.2% 15.6% 26.7%
Q11-19. Inclusion services/therapeutic
recreation 7.7% 0.0% 30.8% 15.4% 46.2%
Q11-20. Special events 7.9% 28.9% 36.0% 16.7% 10.5% Q11-21. Fishing programs 8.3% 30.6% 33.3% 12.5% 15.3% Q11-22. Nature programs 17.5% 27.3% 29.4% 15.4% 10.5% Q11-23. Golf programs 27.6% 34.2% 27.6% 7.9% 2.6% Q11-24. Outdoor adventure (camping,
backpacking, etc.) 16.7% 22.2% 30.0% 17.8% 13.3%
Q11-25. Canoeing & kayaking 22.0% 25.8% 32.6% 14.4% 5.3% Q11-26. Travel & tourism (day trips) 1.9% 14.4% 31.7% 18.3% 33.7% Q11-27. Other 25.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 75.0%
Page 83
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q11-27. Other
Q11-27. Other Number Percent
Skateboarding lessons for adults and youth 1 14.3 %
Skeet, trap, rifle, and pistol range 1 14.3 %
Indoor swim pool 1 14.3 %
Indoor swim in winter 1 14.3 %
Walking/hiking 1 14.3 %
Photography 1 14.3 %
Therapy pools 1 14.3 %
Total 7 100.0 %
Page 84
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q12. Which FOUR of the programs from the list in Question 11 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household?
Q12. Top choice Number Percent
Youth Learn to Swim programs 39 9.0 %
Pre-school programs 12 2.8 %
Before & after school programs 13 3.0 %
Youth summer camp programs 5 1.2 %
Youth sports programs 19 4.4 %
Youth fitness & wellness programs 4 0.9 %
eSport gaming programs 2 0.5 %
Virtual/distance/online programs 1 0.2 %
Teens/tweens programs 4 0.9 %
Martial arts programs 2 0.5 %
Adult fitness & wellness programs 64 14.8 %
Water fitness programs 25 5.8 %
Tennis lessons & leagues 3 0.7 %
Youth gymnastics & cheerleading 4 0.9 %
Senior programs (e.g., games, social, crafts) 16 3.7 %
Active senior programs (e.g., pickleball, fitness) 15 3.5 %
Youth & adult arts & crafts programs 6 1.4 %
Youth & adult drama/performing arts programs 3 0.7 %
Inclusion services/therapeutic recreation 3 0.7 %
Special events 20 4.6 %
Fishing programs 4 0.9 %
Nature programs 11 2.5 %
Golf programs 14 3.2 %
Outdoor adventure (camping, backpacking, etc.) 15 3.5 %
Canoeing & kayaking 13 3.0 %
Travel & tourism (day trips) 7 1.6 %
Other 4 0.9 %
None chosen 104 24.1 %
Total 432 100.0 %
Page 85
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q12. Which FOUR of the programs from the list in Question 11 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household?
Q12. 2nd choice Number Percent
Youth Learn to Swim programs 23 5.3 %
Pre-school programs 5 1.2 %
Before & after school programs 13 3.0 %
Youth summer camp programs 12 2.8 %
Youth sports programs 22 5.1 %
Youth fitness & wellness programs 7 1.6 %
eSport gaming programs 2 0.5 %
Virtual/distance/online programs 9 2.1 %
Teens/tweens programs 3 0.7 %
Adult fitness & wellness programs 32 7.4 %
Water fitness programs 24 5.6 %
Tennis lessons & leagues 5 1.2 %
Youth gymnastics & cheerleading 2 0.5 %
Senior programs (e.g., games, social, crafts) 20 4.6 %
Active senior programs (e.g., pickleball, fitness) 17 3.9 %
Youth & adult arts & crafts programs 13 3.0 %
Youth & adult drama/performing arts programs 2 0.5 %
Inclusion services/therapeutic recreation 2 0.5 %
Special events 16 3.7 %
Fishing programs 7 1.6 %
Nature programs 25 5.8 %
Golf programs 11 2.5 %
Outdoor adventure (camping, backpacking, etc.) 10 2.3 %
Canoeing & kayaking 13 3.0 %
Travel & tourism (day trips) 7 1.6 %
Other 1 0.2 %
None chosen 129 29.9 %
Total 432 100.0 %
Page 86
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q12. Which FOUR of the programs from the list in Question 11 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household?
Q12. 3rd choice Number Percent
Youth Learn to Swim programs 12 2.8 %
Pre-school programs 1 0.2 %
Before & after school programs 5 1.2 %
Youth summer camp programs 11 2.5 %
Youth sports programs 8 1.9 %
Youth fitness & wellness programs 5 1.2 %
eSport gaming programs 4 0.9 %
Virtual/distance/online programs 1 0.2 %
Teens/tweens programs 7 1.6 %
Adult fitness & wellness programs 29 6.7 %
Water fitness programs 12 2.8 %
Tennis lessons & leagues 1 0.2 %
Youth gymnastics & cheerleading 4 0.9 %
Senior programs (e.g., games, social, crafts) 13 3.0 %
Active senior programs (e.g., pickleball, fitness) 16 3.7 %
Youth & adult arts & crafts programs 20 4.6 %
Youth & adult drama/performing arts programs 5 1.2 %
Inclusion services/therapeutic recreation 6 1.4 %
Special events 18 4.2 %
Fishing programs 11 2.5 %
Nature programs 26 6.0 %
Golf programs 13 3.0 %
Outdoor adventure (camping, backpacking, etc.) 11 2.5 %
Canoeing & kayaking 11 2.5 %
Travel & tourism (day trips) 18 4.2 %
None chosen 164 38.0 %
Total 432 100.0 %
Page 87
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q12. Which FOUR of the programs from the list in Question 11 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household?
Q12. 4th choice Number Percent
Youth Learn to Swim programs 5 1.2 %
Pre-school programs 3 0.7 %
Before & after school programs 2 0.5 %
Youth summer camp programs 7 1.6 %
Youth sports programs 7 1.6 %
Youth fitness & wellness programs 9 2.1 %
eSport gaming programs 1 0.2 %
Virtual/distance/online programs 4 0.9 %
Teens/tweens programs 6 1.4 %
Martial arts programs 3 0.7 %
Adult fitness & wellness programs 12 2.8 %
Water fitness programs 7 1.6 %
Tennis lessons & leagues 3 0.7 %
Youth gymnastics & cheerleading 2 0.5 %
Senior programs (e.g., games, social, crafts) 5 1.2 %
Active senior programs (e.g., pickleball, fitness) 11 2.5 %
Youth & adult arts & crafts programs 19 4.4 %
Youth & adult drama/performing arts programs 6 1.4 %
Inclusion services/therapeutic recreation 3 0.7 %
Special events 14 3.2 %
Fishing programs 6 1.4 %
Nature programs 28 6.5 %
Golf programs 8 1.9 %
Outdoor adventure (camping, backpacking, etc.) 10 2.3 %
Canoeing & kayaking 17 3.9 %
Travel & tourism (day trips) 16 3.7 %
Other 3 0.7 %
None chosen 215 49.8 %
Total 432 100.0 %
Page 88
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
SUM OF THE TOP FOUR CHOICES
Q12. Which FOUR of the programs from the list in Question 11 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (top
4)
Q12. Top choice Number Percent
Youth Learn to Swim programs 79 18.3 %
Pre-school programs 21 4.9 %
Before & after school programs 33 7.6 %
Youth summer camp programs 35 8.1 %
Youth sports programs 56 13.0 %
Youth fitness & wellness programs 25 5.8 %
eSport gaming programs 9 2.1 %
Virtual/distance/online programs 15 3.5 %
Teens/tweens programs 20 4.6 %
Martial arts programs 5 1.2 %
Adult fitness & wellness programs 137 31.7 %
Water fitness programs 68 15.7 %
Tennis lessons & leagues 12 2.8 %
Youth gymnastics & cheerleading 12 2.8 %
Senior programs (e.g., games, social, crafts) 54 12.5 %
Active senior programs (e.g., pickleball, fitness) 59 13.7 %
Youth & adult arts & crafts programs 58 13.4 %
Youth & adult drama/performing arts programs 16 3.7 %
Inclusion services/therapeutic recreation 14 3.2 %
Special events 68 15.7 %
Fishing programs 28 6.5 %
Nature programs 90 20.8 %
Golf programs 46 10.6 %
Outdoor adventure (camping, backpacking, etc.) 46 10.6 %
Canoeing & kayaking 54 12.5 %
Travel & tourism (day trips) 48 11.1 %
Other 8 1.9 %
None chosen 104 24.1 %
Total 1220
Page 89
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q13. The following is a list of potential actions Brookings Parks could take to improve the parks and recreation
system. For each potential action, please indicate if you would be "Very Supportive," "Somewhat Supportive,"
"Not Supportive" or "Not Sure" of the action.
(N=432)
Very
Supportive
Somewhat
Supportive
Not
Supportive Not Sure
Q13-1. Improve existing small neighborhood parks 47.7% 31.9% 2.3% 18.1% Q13-2. Improve existing large community parks 47.7% 31.9% 4.6% 15.7% Q13-3. Improve existing nature preserves 53.2% 25.7% 4.4% 16.7% Q13-4. Improve existing youth sports fields 25.0% 37.3% 12.7% 25.0% Q13-5. Improve existing paved walking & biking trails 58.1% 24.3% 3.5% 14.1% Q13-6. Improve existing golf course 19.4% 22.9% 29.6% 28.0% Q13-7. Improve existing tennis court facilities 13.0% 28.2% 26.2% 32.6% Q13-8. Improve existing adult sports fields 10.0% 31.5% 24.8% 33.8% Q13-9. Improve existing nature center 40.3% 29.4% 9.7% 20.6% Q13-10. Improve existing swimming pools 38.4% 29.9% 9.7% 22.0% Q13-11. Acquire new park land 34.7% 25.0% 13.7% 26.6% Q13-12. Replace aging outdoor swimming pool 28.9% 26.9% 20.8% 23.4% Q13-13. Develop new indoor recreation center 41.0% 23.8% 15.0% 20.1% Q13-14. Develop new splash parks 24.3% 26.9% 23.6% 25.2% Q13-15. Develop new indoor swimming pool 40.0% 21.8% 17.6% 20.6% Q13-16. Develop new youth sports fields 16.0% 33.1% 23.6% 27.3% Q13-17. Develop new pickleball courts 13.9% 22.9% 30.3% 32.9% Q13-18. Develop new trails that connect to existing
trails 53.7% 22.7% 7.6% 16.0%
Q13-19. Develop new dog parks 18.8% 23.4% 29.4% 28.5% Q13-20. Develop sledding hill 37.0% 27.8% 13.9% 21.3% Q13-21. Develop outdoor office space 5.8% 13.7% 39.8% 40.7% Q13-22. Transfer HOA property to neighborhoods 6.7% 10.0% 21.5% 61.8% Q13-23. Other 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Page 90
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q13-23. Other
Q13-23. Other Number Percent
Preserve historical assets, such as pioneer park bandshell 1 5.9 %
Parks and Rec Dept continues to make Brookings stand out from
other communities 1 5.9 %
We need more indoor gymnasium space for youth basketball 1 5.9 %
Add skate bowl 1 5.9 %
Recreational ice rink 1 5.9 %
Shooting range 1 5.9 %
Do not remove all old trees 1 5.9 %
Improve senior center 1 5.9 %
Nature and sustainability education 1 5.9 %
Trampoline park 1 5.9 %
New indoor pool with warm water for children &
older folks 1 5.9 %
Keep bathrooms open during the winter 1 5.9 %
Improve and create gym space 1 5.9 %
Easy access swim for seniors 1 5.9 %
Do things to keep kids out of trouble, like laser tag, paint ball, roller
skating 1 5.9 %
Another disc golf course 1 5.9 %
Shovel more at nature park 1 5.9 %
Total 17 100.0 %
Page 91
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q14. Which THREE potential actions listed in Question 13 is most important to you and your household?
Q14. Top choice Number Percent
Improve existing small neighborhood parks 28 6.5 %
Improve existing large community parks 14 3.2 %
Improve existing nature preserves 27 6.3 %
Improve existing youth sports fields 19 4.4 %
Improve existing paved walking & biking trails 57 13.2 %
Improve existing golf course 15 3.5 %
Improve existing tennis court facilities 2 0.5 %
Improve existing nature center 3 0.7 %
Improve existing swimming pools 12 2.8 %
Acquire new park land 10 2.3 %
Replace aging outdoor swimming pool 7 1.6 %
Develop new indoor recreation center 45 10.4 %
Develop new splash parks 7 1.6 %
Develop new indoor swimming pool 37 8.6 %
Develop new youth sports fields 4 0.9 %
Develop new pickleball courts 8 1.9 %
Develop new trails that connect to existing trails 45 10.4 %
Develop new dog parks 14 3.2 %
Develop sledding hill 9 2.1 %
Develop outdoor office space 2 0.5 %
Other 7 1.6 %
None chosen 60 13.9 %
Total 432 100.0 %
Page 92
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q14. Which THREE potential actions listed in Question 13 is most important to you and your household?
Q14. 2nd choice Number Percent
Improve existing small neighborhood parks 18 4.2 %
Improve existing large community parks 12 2.8 %
Improve existing nature preserves 23 5.3 %
Improve existing youth sports fields 12 2.8 %
Improve existing paved walking & biking trails 49 11.3 %
Improve existing golf course 9 2.1 %
Improve existing tennis court facilities 4 0.9 %
Improve existing adult sports fields 1 0.2 %
Improve existing nature center 22 5.1 %
Improve existing swimming pools 14 3.2 %
Acquire new park land 8 1.9 %
Replace aging outdoor swimming pool 11 2.5 %
Develop new indoor recreation center 45 10.4 %
Develop new splash parks 7 1.6 %
Develop new indoor swimming pool 38 8.8 %
Develop new youth sports fields 4 0.9 %
Develop new pickleball courts 5 1.2 %
Develop new trails that connect to existing trails 45 10.4 %
Develop new dog parks 7 1.6 %
Develop sledding hill 21 4.9 %
Other 1 0.2 %
None chosen 76 17.6 %
Total 432 100.0 %
Page 93
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q14. Which THREE potential actions listed in Question 13 is most important to you and your household?
Q14. 3rd choice Number Percent
Improve existing small neighborhood parks 16 3.7 %
Improve existing large community parks 22 5.1 %
Improve existing nature preserves 21 4.9 %
Improve existing youth sports fields 20 4.6 %
Improve existing paved walking & biking trails 37 8.6 %
Improve existing golf course 6 1.4 %
Improve existing adult sports fields 4 0.9 %
Improve existing nature center 19 4.4 %
Improve existing swimming pools 15 3.5 %
Acquire new park land 16 3.7 %
Replace aging outdoor swimming pool 10 2.3 %
Develop new indoor recreation center 17 3.9 %
Develop new splash parks 12 2.8 %
Develop new indoor swimming pool 25 5.8 %
Develop new youth sports fields 11 2.5 %
Develop new pickleball courts 9 2.1 %
Develop new trails that connect to existing trails 35 8.1 %
Develop new dog parks 8 1.9 %
Develop sledding hill 26 6.0 %
Develop outdoor office space 1 0.2 %
Transfer HOA property to neighborhoods 1 0.2 %
Other 4 0.9 %
None chosen 97 22.5 %
Total 432 100.0 %
Page 94
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
SUM OF THE TOP THREE CHOICES
Q14. Which THREE potential actions listed in Question 13 is most important to you and your household?
(top 3)
Q14. Sum of the top three choices Number Percent
Improve existing small neighborhood parks 62 14.4 %
Improve existing large community parks 48 11.1 %
Improve existing nature preserves 71 16.4 %
Improve existing youth sports fields 51 11.8 %
Improve existing paved walking & biking trails 143 33.1 %
Improve existing golf course 30 6.9 %
Improve existing tennis court facilities 6 1.4 %
Improve existing adult sports fields 5 1.2 %
Improve existing nature center 44 10.2 %
Improve existing swimming pools 41 9.5 %
Acquire new park land 34 7.9 %
Replace aging outdoor swimming pool 28 6.5 %
Develop new indoor recreation center 107 24.8 %
Develop new splash parks 26 6.0 %
Develop new indoor swimming pool 100 23.1 %
Develop new youth sports fields 19 4.4 %
Develop new pickleball courts 22 5.1 %
Develop new trails that connect to existing trails 125 28.9 %
Develop new dog parks 29 6.7 %
Develop sledding hill 56 13.0 %
Develop outdoor office space 3 0.7 %
Transfer HOA property to neighborhoods 1 0.2 %
Other 12 2.8 %
None chosen 60 13.9 %
Total 1123
Page 95
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q15. Listed below are the potential funding mechanisms that could be used to pay for the actions you
indicated you most support in Question 14. Please rate your level of support for each of the following funding
mechanisms.
(N=432)
Very
Supportive
Somewhat
Supportive
Not
Supportive Not Sure
Q15-1. Bond issue approved by voters 31.0% 33.3% 13.7% 22.0% Q15-2. Hotel tax 38.4% 28.0% 11.8% 21.8% Q15-3. Enterprise operations (concession stands, gift
shops, etc.) 32.9% 35.2% 7.4% 24.5%
Q15-4. Program user fees for recreational programs 30.1% 40.7% 9.0% 20.1% Q15-5. Impact/development fees 18.8% 34.3% 11.1% 35.9% Q15-6. Dedicated tax for park improvements 28.0% 30.3% 18.8% 22.9% Q15-7. Other 81.8% 9.1% 0.0% 9.1%
Q15-7. Other
Q15-7. Other Number Percent
Grants 2 18.2 %
Grants, funds from companies & individuals, community fundraisers 1 9.1 %
Public & private grants, charitable donations, partnership between
user & city 1 9.1 %
Allocate local taxes to parks & recreation instead of spending on
other stuff 1 9.1 %
Foundation support 1 9.1 %
Donation 1 9.1 %
General tax revenues 1 9.1 %
Federal grant programs 1 9.1 %
Those who use it should pay for it 1 9.1 %
Fundraisers 1 9.1 %
Total 11 100.0 %
Page 96
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q16. Which THREE funding mechanisms listed in Question 15 do you and your household most support?
Q16. Top choice Number Percent
Bond issue approved by voters 86 19.9 %
Hotel tax 95 22.0 %
Enterprise operations (concession stands, gift shops, etc.) 36 8.3 %
Program user fees for recreational programs 47 10.9 %
Impact/development fees 10 2.3 %
Dedicated tax for park improvements 49 11.3 %
Other 6 1.4 %
None chosen 103 23.8 %
Total 432 100.0 %
Q16. Which THREE funding mechanisms listed in Question 15 do you and your household most support?
Q16. 2nd choice Number Percent
Bond issue approved by voters 42 9.7 %
Hotel tax 52 12.0 %
Enterprise operations (concession stands, gift shops, etc.) 74 17.1 %
Program user fees for recreational programs 66 15.3 %
Impact/development fees 20 4.6 %
Dedicated tax for park improvements 47 10.9 %
Other 3 0.7 %
None chosen 128 29.6 %
Total 432 100.0 %
Page 97
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q16. Which THREE funding mechanisms listed in Question 15 do you and your household most support?
Q16. 3rd choice Number Percent
Bond issue approved by voters 36 8.3 %
Hotel tax 30 6.9 %
Enterprise operations (concession stands, gift shops, etc.) 54 12.5 %
Program user fees for recreational programs 55 12.7 %
Impact/development fees 40 9.3 %
Dedicated tax for park improvements 44 10.2 %
None chosen 173 40.0 %
Total 432 100.0 %
SUM OF THE TOP THREE CHOICES
Q16. Which THREE funding mechanisms listed in Question 15 do you and your household most support?
(top 3)
Q16. Top choice Number Percent
Bond issue approved by voters 164 38.0 %
Hotel tax 177 41.0 %
Enterprise operations (concession stands, gift shops, etc.) 164 38.0 %
Program user fees for recreational programs 168 38.9 %
Impact/development fees 70 16.2 %
Dedicated tax for park improvements 140 32.4 %
Other 9 2.1 %
None chosen 103 23.8 %
Total 995
Page 98
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q17. If you had a budget of $100, how would you allocate the funds among the categories of funding listed
below?
Mean Percent Amount ($)
Improve existing neighborhood & community parks (playgrounds,
shelters, etc.) 22.14 14.50% $14.50
Acquire new parkland & open space for parks 19.13 12.54% $12.54
Construct new walking & biking trails & improve existing trails where
needed 32.85 21.53% $21.53
Improve existing outdoor facilities (sports fields, water park, etc.) 19.67 12.89% $12.89
Develop additional outdoor facilities (sports fields, spray park, etc.) 16.55 10.85% $10.85
Develop indoor facilities (multigenerational recreation center,
running/walking track, indoor playgrounds, sports fields, etc.) 42.25 27.69% $27.69
Total 152.59 100.0% $100.00
Page 99
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q18. Please rate your satisfaction with the following Parks and Recreation services provided by Brookings
Parks, Recreation and Forestry Department using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1
means "Very Dissatisfied."
(N=432)
Very
Satisfied
Somewhat
Satisfied Neutral Somewhat
Dissatisfied
Very
Dissatisfied
Don’t
Know
Q18-1. Availability of information
about programs & facilities 16.4% 38.2% 19.4% 9.3% 1.6% 15.0%
Q18-2. Customer assistance by staff 23.4% 19.9% 20.8% 2.1% 0.2% 33.6% Q18-3. Ease of registering for
programs 12.3% 24.5% 20.4% 4.2% 1.4% 37.3%
Q18-4. Fees charged for recreation
programs 14.1% 23.8% 25.7% 3.9% 1.2% 31.3%
Q18-5. Maintenance of parks/facilities 29.4% 40.0% 12.0% 4.6% 1.6% 12.3% Q18-6. Park & facility accessibility (ADA
compliant access) 21.8% 24.1% 18.3% 2.8% 0.7% 32.4%
Q18-7. Park/facility rule awareness &
enforcement 15.3% 24.1% 25.2% 6.5% 2.8% 26.2%
Q18-8. Overall quality of sports fields 16.4% 31.9% 16.0% 2.1% 0.7% 32.9% Q18-9. Quality/number of outdoor
amenities 16.7% 36.1% 20.4% 8.3% 1.9% 16.7%
Q18-10. Shelter, gym, or meeting room
rental availability 8.1% 17.4% 22.2% 10.4% 2.1% 39.8%
Q18-11. Ease of renting shelters, gyms,
or meeting rooms 9.3% 18.8% 22.5% 5.6% 1.2% 42.8%
Q18-12. User friendliness of website 9.3% 20.1% 27.8% 5.3% 1.9% 35.6% Q18-13. Amount of open greenspace 21.3% 37.0% 17.6% 5.6% 0.9% 17.6% Q18-14. Ease of contacting City staff 16.4% 21.8% 21.3% 2.1% 0.9% 37.5% Q18-15. Amount of developed
parkland 16.2% 34.5% 22.2% 6.7% 0.9% 19.4%
Q18-16. Amount of available indoor
recreation space 4.4% 11.1% 22.0% 21.8% 16.7% 24.1%
Q18-17. Connectivity of trails &
pathways 9.7% 33.1% 20.1% 16.2% 2.3% 18.5%
Page 100
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW”
Q18. Please rate your satisfaction with the following Parks and Recreation services provided by Brookings
Parks, Recreation and Forestry Department using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1
means "Very Dissatisfied." (without "don't know")
(N=432)
Very
Satisfied
Somewhat
Satisfied Neutral Somewhat
Dissatisfied
Very
Dissatisfied
Q18-1. Availability of information about
programs & facilities 19.3% 45.0% 22.9% 10.9% 1.9%
Q18-2. Customer assistance by staff 35.2% 30.0% 31.4% 3.1% 0.3% Q18-3. Ease of registering for programs 19.6% 39.1% 32.5% 6.6% 2.2% Q18-4. Fees charged for recreation programs 20.5% 34.7% 37.4% 5.7% 1.7% Q18-5. Maintenance of parks/facilities 33.5% 45.6% 13.7% 5.3% 1.8% Q18-6. Park & facility accessibility (ADA
compliant access) 32.2% 35.6% 27.1% 4.1% 1.0%
Q18-7. Park/facility rule awareness &
enforcement 20.7% 32.6% 34.2% 8.8% 3.8%
Q18-8. Overall quality of sports fields 24.5% 47.6% 23.8% 3.1% 1.0% Q18-9. Quality/number of outdoor amenities 20.0% 43.3% 24.4% 10.0% 2.2% Q18-10. Shelter, gym, or meeting room rental
availability 13.5% 28.8% 36.9% 17.3% 3.5%
Q18-11. Ease of renting shelters, gyms, or
meeting rooms 16.2% 32.8% 39.3% 9.7% 2.0%
Q18-12. User friendliness of website 14.4% 31.3% 43.2% 8.3% 2.9% Q18-13. Amount of open greenspace 25.8% 44.9% 21.3% 6.7% 1.1% Q18-14. Ease of contacting City staff 26.3% 34.8% 34.1% 3.3% 1.5% Q18-15. Amount of developed parkland 20.1% 42.8% 27.6% 8.3% 1.1% Q18-16. Amount of available indoor
recreation space 5.8% 14.6% 29.0% 28.7% 22.0%
Q18-17. Connectivity of trails & pathways 11.9% 40.6% 24.7% 19.9% 2.8%
Page 101
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q19. Which THREE Parks and Recreation services listed in Question 18 do you think should receive the MOST
ATTENTION from Brookings over the next FIVE years?
Q19. Top choice Number Percent
Availability of information about programs & facilities 22 5.1 %
Customer assistance by staff 2 0.5 %
Ease of registering for programs 6 1.4 %
Fees charged for recreation programs 5 1.2 %
Maintenance of parks/facilities 43 10.0 %
Park & facility accessibility (ADA compliant access) 8 1.9 %
Park/facility rule awareness & enforcement 7 1.6 %
Overall quality of sports fields 8 1.9 %
Quality/number of outdoor amenities 17 3.9 %
Shelter, gym, or meeting room rental availability 10 2.3 %
Ease of renting shelters, gyms, or meeting rooms 1 0.2 %
User friendliness of website 5 1.2 %
Amount of open greenspace 9 2.1 %
Ease of contacting City staff 1 0.2 %
Amount of developed parkland 11 2.5 %
Amount of available indoor recreation space 105 24.3 %
Connectivity of trails & pathways 75 17.4 %
None chosen 97 22.5 %
Total 432 100.0 %
Q19. Which THREE Parks and Recreation services listed in Question 18 do you think should receive the MOST
ATTENTION from Brookings over the next FIVE years?
Q19. 2nd choice Number Percent
Availability of information about programs & facilities 28 6.5 %
Customer assistance by staff 6 1.4 %
Ease of registering for programs 10 2.3 %
Fees charged for recreation programs 16 3.7 %
Maintenance of parks/facilities 25 5.8 %
Park & facility accessibility (ADA compliant access) 9 2.1 %
Park/facility rule awareness & enforcement 7 1.6 %
Overall quality of sports fields 15 3.5 %
Quality/number of outdoor amenities 32 7.4 %
Shelter, gym, or meeting room rental availability 16 3.7 %
Ease of renting shelters, gyms, or meeting rooms 7 1.6 %
User friendliness of website 9 2.1 %
Amount of open greenspace 19 4.4 %
Ease of contacting City staff 3 0.7 %
Amount of developed parkland 20 4.6 %
Amount of available indoor recreation space 46 10.6 %
Connectivity of trails & pathways 38 8.8 %
None chosen 126 29.2 %
Total 432 100.0 %
Page 102
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q19. Which THREE Parks and Recreation services listed in Question 18 do you think should receive the MOST
ATTENTION from Brookings over the next FIVE years?
Q19. 3rd choice Number Percent
Availability of information about programs & facilities 17 3.9 %
Customer assistance by staff 2 0.5 %
Ease of registering for programs 7 1.6 %
Fees charged for recreation programs 13 3.0 %
Maintenance of parks/facilities 28 6.5 %
Park & facility accessibility (ADA compliant access) 9 2.1 %
Park/facility rule awareness & enforcement 13 3.0 %
Overall quality of sports fields 10 2.3 %
Quality/number of outdoor amenities 31 7.2 %
Shelter, gym, or meeting room rental availability 7 1.6 %
Ease of renting shelters, gyms, or meeting rooms 7 1.6 %
User friendliness of website 8 1.9 %
Amount of open greenspace 20 4.6 %
Ease of contacting City staff 1 0.2 %
Amount of developed parkland 24 5.6 %
Amount of available indoor recreation space 20 4.6 %
Connectivity of trails & pathways 31 7.2 %
None chosen 184 42.6 %
Total 432 100.0 %
SUM OF THE TOP THREE CHOICES
Q19. Which THREE Parks and Recreation services listed in Question 18 do you think should receive the MOST
ATTENTION from Brookings over the next FIVE years? (top 3)
Q19. Sum of the top three choices Number Percent
Availability of information about programs & facilities 67 15.5 %
Customer assistance by staff 10 2.3 %
Ease of registering for programs 23 5.3 %
Fees charged for recreation programs 34 7.9 %
Maintenance of parks/facilities 96 22.2 %
Park & facility accessibility (ADA compliant access) 26 6.0 %
Park/facility rule awareness & enforcement 27 6.3 %
Overall quality of sports fields 33 7.6 %
Quality/number of outdoor amenities 80 18.5 %
Shelter, gym, or meeting room rental availability 33 7.6 %
Ease of renting shelters, gyms, or meeting rooms 15 3.5 %
User friendliness of website 22 5.1 %
Amount of open greenspace 48 11.1 %
Ease of contacting City staff 5 1.2 %
Amount of developed parkland 55 12.7 %
Amount of available indoor recreation space 171 39.6 %
Connectivity of trails & pathways 144 33.3 %
None chosen 97 22.5 %
Total 986
Page 103
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q20. Counting yourself, how many people in your household are...
Mean Sum Percent
Under age 5 0.2 81 7.1%
Ages 5-9 0.3 110 9.7%
Ages 10-14 0.2 98 8.6%
Ages 15-19 0.1 62 5.5%
Ages 20-24 0.1 37 3.3%
Ages 25-34 0.3 116 10.2%
Ages 35-44 0.4 160 14.1%
Ages 45-54 0.3 143 12.6%
Ages 55-64 0.4 158 13.9%
Ages 65-74 0.3 118 10.4%
Ages 75+ 0.1 53 4.7%
Total 2.7 1136 100.0%
Q21. How many years have you lived in the City of Brookings?
Q21. How many years have you lived in City of Brookings? Number Percent
0-5 years 63 14.6 %
6-10 years 54 12.5 %
11-15 years 42 9.7 %
16-20 years 45 10.4 %
21-30 years 63 14.6 %
31 years or longer 149 34.5 %
Not Provided 16 3.7 %
Total 432 100.0 %
WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED”
Q21. How many years have you lived in the City of Brookings? (without "not provided")
Q21. How many years have you lived in City of Brookings? Number Percent
0-5 years 63 15.1 %
6-10 years 54 13.0 %
11-15 years 42 10.1 %
16-20 years 45 10.8 %
21-30 years 63 15.1 %
31 years or longer 149 35.8 %
Total 416 100.0 %
Page 104
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q22. What is your age?
Q22. Your age: Number Percent
18-34 years 84 19.4 %
35-44 years 90 20.8 %
45-54 years 84 19.4 %
55-64 years 87 20.1 %
65 years or older 83 19.2 %
Not Provided 4 0.9 %
Total 432 100.0 %
WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED”
Q22. What is your age? (without "not provided")
Q22. Your age: Number Percent
18-34 years 84 19.6 %
35-44 years 90 21.0 %
45-54 years 84 19.6 %
55-64 years 87 20.3 %
65 years or older 83 19.4 %
Total 428 100.0 %
Q23. Your gender:
Q23. Your gender: Number Percent
Male 208 48.1 %
Female 212 49.1 %
Non-binary 1 0.2 %
Not provided 11 2.5 %
Total 432 100.0 %
WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED”
Q23. Your gender: (without "not provided")
Q23. Your gender: Number Percent
Male 208 49.4 %
Female 212 50.4 %
Non-binary 1 0.2 %
Total 421 100.0 %
Page 105
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q24. Which of the following best describes your race/ethnicity?
Q24. Your race/ethnicity: Number Percent
Asian/Pacific Islander 14 3.2 %
African American/Black 6 1.4 %
Native American/Eskimo 6 1.4 %
White/Caucasian 391 90.5 %
Hispanic/Latino/Spanish 6 1.4 %
Other 3 0.7 %
Total 426
Q24-6. Other
Q24-6. Other Number Percent
Basque 1 33.3 %
Italian 1 33.3 %
White American 1 33.3 %
Total 3 100.0 %
Page 106
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Q25. What is your total annual household income?
Q25. Your total annual household income: Number Percent
Under $25K 44 10.2 %
$25K to $49,999 55 12.7 %
$50K to $74,999 91 21.1 %
$75K to $99,999 72 16.7 %
$100K to $149,999 61 14.1 %
$150K+ 43 10.0 %
Not Provided 66 15.3 %
Total 432 100.0 %
WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED”
Q25. What is your total annual household income? (without "not provided")
Q25. Your total annual household income: Number Percent
Under $25K 44 12.0 %
$25K to $49,999 55 15.0 %
$50K to $74,999 91 24.9 %
$75K to $99,999 72 19.7 %
$100K to $149,999 61 16.7 %
$150K+ 43 11.7 %
Total 366 100.0 %
Page 107
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Tabular Data
Survey Instrument
Page 108
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
BRING YOUR DREAMS
A Few Minutes of Your Time Will Shape the Future of Brookings Parks
and Recreation!
Dear Resident:
Your response to the enclosed survey is extremely important. ..
Brookings Parks, Recreation & Forestry Department is conducting a Citizen Survey as
part of a Parks and Recreation Master Plan to help determine priorities for our
community. Your household is one of a limited number selected at random to receive
this survey, so your participation is very important.
We appreciate your time ...
We realize that this survey will take approximately 10-15 minutes to complete, but each
question is important. The time you invest in completing this survey will aid Brookings
Parks, Recreation & Forestry Department in taking a resident-driven approach to
making decisions that will enrich the future of our City and positively affect the lives of
our residents.
Please complete and return your survey within the next two weeks.
ETC Institute, an independent consulting company, will administer the survey and
compile the results.
Your responses will remain confidential.Please return your completed survey in the
enclosed postage-paid envelope addressed to ETC Institute, 725 W. Frontier Circle,
Olathe, KS 66061. If you prefer to take the survey by web, the address is
brookingssurvey.org.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Dusty Rodiek, Parks, Recreation
& Forestry Department at (605) 692-2708 or drodiek@cityofbrookings.org. The Citizen
Survey is a tool that will benefit all residents. Don't miss this opportunity to make your
voice heard!
Sincerely,
Lk�w-Keith W. Corbett, Mayor
p�K �
D�iek, Director
Parks, Recreation & Forestry
Page 109
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Community Interest and Opinion Survey
Let your voice be heard today!
The Brookings Parks, Recreation and Forestry Department would like your input to help determine park and
recreation priorities for our community. This survey will take 10-15 minutes to complete. When you are
finished, please return your survey in the enclosed postage-paid, return envelope.
1. In the last 12 months, have you or other members of your household used any parks or facilities
offered by the Brookings Parks, Recreation and Forestry Department?
____(1) Yes [Answer Q1a.] ____(2) No [Skip to Q2.]
1a. How would you rate the overall quality of parks or facilities that you and members of your
household have used?
____(1) Excellent ____(2) Good ____(3) Fair ____(4) Poor
2. In the last 24 months, have you or other members of your household participated in any recreation
programs offered by the Parks, Recreation and Forestry Department?
____(1) Yes [Answer Q2a.] ____(2) No [Skip to Q3.]
2a. How would you rate the overall quality of programs that you and members of your
household have participated in?
____(1) Excellent ____(2) Good ____(3) Fair ____(4) Poor
3. From the following list, please CHECK ALL of the organizations that you and members of your
household have used for indoor and outdoor recreation activities during the last 12 months.
____(01) Boys and Girls Club
____(02) School Districts
____(03) Youth sports associations
____(04) Churches
____(05) Neighboring communities
____(06) Brookings Parks, & Forestry Dept.
____(07) Private clubs (tennis, fitness & dance)
____(08) South Dakota State Recreation Areas
____(09) South Dakota State University
____(10) Homeowners associations/apartment complex
____(11) Travel sports teams
____(12) None. Do not use any organizations
4. Please CHECK ALL the ways you learn about Brookings Parks, Recreation, and Forestry
Department programs and services.
____(01) Department Program Guide
____(02) Website
____(03) Newspaper articles
____(04) Radio
____(05) Cable access television
____(06) At Parks and Facilities
____(07) From friends and neighbors
____(08) School flyers/newsletters
____(09) Monthly e-newsletter
____(10) Department staff
____(11) Facebook
____(12) Twitter
____(13) Instagram
____(14) Next Door
____(15) Other: _____________________________________________
5. What are your preferred ways to learn about programs and services? [Write in your answers below
using the number from the list in Question 4, or circle "NONE."]
1st: ____ 2nd: ____ 3rd: ____ NONE
Page 110
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
6. Please CHECK ALL the reasons that deter you or other members of your household from using
parks, recreation facilities or programs of Brookings Parks, Recreation and Forestry more often.
____(01) Facilities are not well maintained
____(02) Program or facility not offered
____(03) We are too busy
____(04) Security is insufficient
____(05) Lack of quality programs
____(06) Too far from our residence
____(07) Class full
____(08) Fees are too high
____(09) Program times are not convenient
____(10) Use facilities in other communities
____(11) Poor customer service by staff
____(12) I do not know locations of facilities
____(13) Facilities don't have the right equipment
____(14) Language barriers are difficult
____(15) I do not know what is being offered
____(16) Facility operating hours not convenient
____(17) Registration for programs is difficult
____(18) Lack of parking
____(19) Use services of other agencies
____(20) Lack of accessibility
____(21) Nothing deters me from participating
____(22) None. I do not use facilities
7. The costs to provide recreation programs are funded through a combination of participant fees
and general tax revenues. The following are categories of programs offered by Brookings Parks,
Recreation and Forestry Dept. For each program category please indicate what percent of the
program costs should be paid by taxes and what percent by user fees.
Programs 100% taxes
0% Fees
75% taxes
25% Fees
50% taxes
50% Fees
25% taxes
75% Fees
0% taxes
100% Fees Don't Know
01. Youth sports programs 5 4 3 2 1 9
02. Adult sports programs 5 4 3 2 1 9
03. Youth camps 5 4 3 2 1 9
04. Adult classes (exercise, arts, dance, etc.) 5 4 3 2 1 9
05. Youth classes (arts, dance, etc.) 5 4 3 2 1 9
06. Learn to swim programs 5 4 3 2 1 9
07. Senior Adults classes 5 4 3 2 1 9
08. Special events and festivals 5 4 3 2 1 9
09. Programs for low-income residents 5 4 3 2 1 9
10. Programs for special populations/disabled 5 4 3 2 1 9
11. Field rentals for youth sports tournaments 5 4 3 2 1 9
12. Field rentals for adult sports tournaments 5 4 3 2 1 9
8. Please circle the time of day that members of your household would most prefer to use recreation
programs offered by Brookings Parks, Recreation and Forestry Department. Please select "N/A"
if there is no one in your household in that age group.
Household Member Morning Afternoon Evening Anytime N/A
1. Child (under age 6) 4 3 2 1 9
2. Youth (ages 6-12) 4 3 2 1 9
3. Teen (ages 13-17) 4 3 2 1 9
4. Adult (ages 18-59) 4 3 2 1 9
5. Older Adult (ages 60+) 4 3 2 1 9
6. Family 4 3 2 1 9
Page 111
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
9. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need for each of the parks and
recreational facilities listed below by circling either "Yes" or "No." If "Yes," please rate the
recreation parks/facilities in your community using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means the needs of
your household are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met."
Type of Parks/Facility Do you have a need
for this facility?
If "Yes," how well are your needs being met?
100% Met 75% Met 50% Met 25% Met 0% Met
01. Youth soccer fields Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
02. Youth baseball and softball fields Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
03. Youth football fields Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
04. Adult softball fields Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
05. Adult soccer fields Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
06. Multipurpose fields for practice and open play Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
07. Small neighborhood parks Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
08. Large community parks Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
09. Off-leash dog parks Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
10. Outdoor swimming pools/splashpads Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
11. Playground equipment Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
12. Outdoor basketball courts Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
13. Outdoor tennis courts Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
14. Outdoor ice-skating rinks Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
15. Pickleball courts Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
16. Paved bike trails Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
17. Mountain biking/single track Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
18. Walking/hiking trails Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
19. Natural areas and wildlife habitats Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
20. Picnic areas and shelters Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
21. Skate parks Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
22. Golf courses Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
23. Disc golf courses Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
24. Community gardens Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
25. Indoor field house sports fields (football, soccer, etc.) Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
26. Indoor playground Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
27. Indoor basketball/volleyball/pickleball courts Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
28. Indoor fitness and exercise facilities Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
29. Indoor running/walking track Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
30. Indoor swimming pools/leisure pool Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
31 Camping Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
32. Sledding hill Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
33. Other: ____________________________________ Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
10. Which FOUR of the parks/facilities from the list in Question 9 are MOST IMPORTANT to your
household? [Write in your answers below using the number from the list in Question 9, or circle "NONE."]
1st: ____ 2nd: ____ 3rd: ____ 4th: ____ NONE
Page 112
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
11. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need for each of the recreation
programs listed below by circling either "Yes" or "No." If "Yes," please rate the recreation
programs in your community using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means the needs of your household
are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met."
Type of Program Do you have a need
for this program?
If "Yes," how well are your needs being met?
100% Met 75% Met 50% Met 25% Met 0% Met
01. Youth Learn to Swim programs Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
02. Pre-school programs Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
03. Before and after school programs Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
04. Youth summer camp programs Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
05. Youth sports programs Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
06. Youth fitness and wellness programs Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
07. E-sport gaming programs Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
08. Virtual/distance/online programs Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
09. Teens/tweens programs Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
10. Martial arts programs Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
11. Adult fitness and wellness programs Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
12. Water fitness programs Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
13. Tennis lessons and leagues Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
14. Youth gymnastics and cheerleading Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
15. Senior programs (e.g., games, social, crafts) Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
16. Active senior programs (e.g., pickleball, fitness) Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
17. Youth and adult arts and crafts programs Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
18. Youth and adult drama/performing arts programs Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
19. Inclusion Services/Therapeutic Recreation Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
20. Special events Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
21. Fishing programs Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
22. Nature programs Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
23. Golf programs Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
24. Outdoor Adventure (camping, backpacking, etc.) Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
25. Canoeing and kayaking Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
26. Travel and tourism (day trips) Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
27. Other: _________________________________ Yes No 5 4 3 2 1
12. Which FOUR of the programs from the list in Question 11 are MOST IMPORTANT to your
household? [Write in your answers below using the number from the list in Question 11, or circle
"NONE."]
1st: ____ 2nd: ____ 3rd: ____ 4th: ____ NONE
Page 113
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
13. The following is a list of potential actions Brookings Parks could take to improve the parks and
recreation system. For each potential action, please indicate if you would be "Very Supportive,"
"Somewhat Supportive," "Not Supportive" or "Not Sure" of the action.
Potential Action Very Supportive Somewhat
Supportive Not Supportive Not Sure
01. Improve existing small neighborhood parks 4 3 2 1
02. Improve existing large community parks 4 3 2 1
03. Improve existing nature preserves 4 3 2 1
04. Improve existing youth sports fields 4 3 2 1
05. Improve existing paved walking and biking trails 4 3 2 1
06. Improve existing golf course 4 3 2 1
07. Improve existing tennis court facilities 4 3 2 1
08. Improve existing adult sports fields 4 3 2 1
09. Improve existing nature center 4 3 2 1
10. Improve existing swimming pools 4 3 2 1
11. Acquire new park land 4 3 2 1
12. Replace aging outdoor swimming pool 4 3 2 1
13. Develop new indoor recreation center 4 3 2 1
14. Develop new splash parks 4 3 2 1
15. Develop new indoor swimming pool 4 3 2 1
16. Develop new youth sports fields 4 3 2 1
17. Develop new pickleball courts 4 3 2 1
18. Develop new trails that connect to existing trails 4 3 2 1
19. Develop new dog parks 4 3 2 1
20. Develop sledding hill 4 3 2 1
21. Develop outdoor office space 4 3 2 1
22. Transfer HOA property to neighborhoods 4 3 2 1
23. Other: ____________________________________ 4 3 2 1
14. Which THREE potential actions listed in Question 13 is most important to you and your
household? [Write in your answers below using the number from the list in Question 13, or circle
"NONE."]
1st: ____ 2nd: ____ 3rd: ____ NONE
15. Listed below are the potential funding mechanisms that could be used to pay for the actions you
indicated you most support in Question 14. Please rate your level of support for each of the
following funding mechanisms.
Potential Action Very Supportive Somewhat
Supportive Not Supportive Not Sure
1. Bond issue approved by voters 4 3 2 1
2. Hotel tax 4 3 2 1
3. Enterprise operations (concession stands, gift shops, etc.) 4 3 2 1
4. Program user fees for recreational programs 4 3 2 1
5. Impact/Development Fees 4 3 2 1
6. Dedicated tax for park improvements 4 3 2 1
7. Other: ____________________________________________ 4 3 2 1
16. Which THREE funding mechanisms listed in Question 15 do you and your household most
support? [Write in your answers below using the number from the list in Question 15, or circle "NONE."]
1st: ____ 2nd: ____ 3rd: ____ NONE
Page 114
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
17. If you had a budget of $100, how would you allocate the funds among the categories of funding
listed below? [Please be sure your total adds up to $100.]
$________ Improve existing neighborhood and community parks (playgrounds, shelters, etc.)
$________ Acquire new parkland and open space for parks
$________ Construct new walking and biking trails and improve existing trails where needed
$________ Improve existing outdoor facilities (sports fields, water park, etc.)
$________ Develop additional outdoor facilities (sports fields, spray park, etc.)
$________ Develop indoor facilities (multigenerational recreation center, running/walking track, indoor playgrounds, sports
fields, etc.)
$100 total
18. Please rate your satisfaction with the following Parks and Recreation services provided by
Brookings Parks, Recreation and Forestry Department using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means
"Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied."
Services Very
Satisfied
Somewhat
Satisfied Neutral Somewhat
Dissatisfied
Very
Dissatisfied Don't Know
01. Availability of information about programs and facilities 5 4 3 2 1 9
02. Customer assistance by staff 5 4 3 2 1 9
03. Ease of registering for programs 5 4 3 2 1 9
04. Fees charged for recreation programs 5 4 3 2 1 9
05. Maintenance of parks/facilities 5 4 3 2 1 9
06. Park and facility accessibility (ADA compliant access) 5 4 3 2 1 9
07. Park/facility rule awareness and enforcement 5 4 3 2 1 9
08. Overall quality of sports fields 5 4 3 2 1 9
09. Quality/number of outdoor amenities 5 4 3 2 1 9
10. Shelter, gym, or meeting room rental availability 5 4 3 2 1 9
11. Ease of renting shelters, gyms, or meeting rooms 5 4 3 2 1 9
12. User friendliness of website 5 4 3 2 1 9
13. Amount of open greenspace 5 4 3 2 1 9
14. Ease of contacting City staff 5 4 3 2 1 9
15. Amount of developed parkland 5 4 3 2 1 9
16. Amount of available indoor recreation space 5 4 3 2 1 9
17. Connectivity of trails and pathways 5 4 3 2 1 9
19. Which THREE Parks and Recreation services listed in Question 18 do you think should receive
the MOST ATTENTION from Brookings over the next FIVE years? [Write in your answers below using
the number from the list in Question 18, or circle "NONE."]
1st: ____ 2nd: ____ 3rd: ____ NONE
20. Counting yourself, how many people in your household are...
Under age 5: ____
Ages 5-9: ____
Ages 10-14: ____
Ages 15-19: ____
Ages 20-24: ____
Ages 25-34: ____
Ages 35-44: ____
Ages 45-54: ____
Ages 55-64: ____
Ages 65-74: ____
Ages 75+: ____
21. How many years have you lived in the City of Brookings? ______ years
22. What is your age? ______ years
23. Your gender:
____(1) Male ____(2) Female ____(3) Non-binary ____(4) Prefer not to answer ____(5) Prefer to self-describe
Page 115
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
24. Which of the following best describes your race/ethnicity? [Check all that apply.]
____(1) Asian/Pacific Islander
____(2) African American/Black
____(3) Native American/Eskimo
____(4) White/Caucasian
____(5) Hispanic/Latino/Spanish
____(6) Other: __________________
25. What is your total annual household income?
____(1) Under $25,000
____(2) $25,000 to $49,999
____(3) $50,000 to $74,999
____(4) $75,000 to $99,999
____(5) $100,000 to $149,999
____(6) $150,000 or more
26. Please share any additional comments that could assist the Brookings Parks, Recreation and
Forestry Department in improving parks, trails, open space, or recreational facilities and services.
This concludes the survey. Thank you for your time.
Please return your completed survey in the enclosed return-reply envelope addressed to:
ETC Institute, 725 W. Frontier Circle, Olathe, KS 66061
Your responses will remain completely
confidential. The address information to the
right will ONLY be used to help identify areas
with special interests. Thank you. Page 116
City of Brookings Community Interest and Opinion Survey: Findings Report (2021)
Partnership and Policy Analysis
Parks and Recreation Master Plan
1
PARTNERSHIPS ASSESSMENT AND POLICY
EXISTING PARTNERSHIPS EVALUATION
A key component of the operations analysis is the evaluation of the Department’s current partnerships. Several partnership
agreements were provided by the Brookings Parks and Recreation Department that included: Brookings Swim Club, Brooking School
District, Community Cultural Center and Brookings Arts Council, Brookings Activity Center, Fishback Soccer Park, and Larson Ice
Center and the Brookings Ice Skating Association.
BROOKINGS SWIM CLUB
The first reviewed partnership agreement was with the Brookings Swim Club. The current agreement is a facility use partnership
agreement and review of it as follows:
• The agreement does not state the purpose of the partnership and what it is the agreement provides to both parties,
which should be listed in a recital that is usually stated at the beginning of the agreement.
• The agreement does outline what the partnership consists of as it applies to access and use of the pool.
• The partnership agreement does outline the expectation of each partner.
• The partnership does not outline the true cost of what the city provides to allow the swim club the use of the pool in both
direct and indirect costs, but it does outline the costs to rent the pool for swim meets hosted by the swim club.
• Operational details are limited. but it does address access and how concessions will be provided to swim groups during
a swim meet.
• The agreement does outline what the program usage is for the use of the pool.
• The point of contact for both parties is outlined, but no detail is included in the agreement such as phone numbers or
email addresses.
• The agreement does not state the length of the agreement and appears to be on a year-to-year basis.
• The agreement does not outline any key performance indicators regarding the partnership and how to measure success
of the partnership.
• The agreement does outline requirements by the swim club for liability insurance.
B ROOKING SCHOOL DISTRICT
The second partnership agreement evaluated was between the City of Brookings Municipal organization and the Brookings School
District 5-1 and review of it as follows:
• The agreement between the school district and the City does include a recital that outlines the purpose of the partnership
and what each party is trying to accomplish for the community.
• The partnership agreement does outline what the agreement consists of such as shared use facilities that are designed
to serve the needs of the City and the school district with the goal to maximize the use of both outdoor and indoor
facilities for the use of students as well as members of the community.
• The partnership agreement does outline how they will cooperate in the maintenance, scheduling and usage of indoor and
outdoor facilities. The agreement also indicates that there is an operational addendum itemizing arrangements for each
school/park facility. It also states that either party may provide for the transfer of funds for services provided or in-
kind payments in lieu of services provided as noted on the operational addendum.
Partnership and Policy Analysis
Parks and Recreation Master Plan
2
• The agreement recites a reporting process each year and how adjustments can and will be made. No operational diagram
on how that works is in the agreement.
• There is not a joint use guideline and philosophy attached to the agreement as stated.
• The indemnification is delineated well in the agreement between each party.
• The termination of the agreement process and timeline is identified for both parties.
• Point of contracts for both parties are identified in the agreement.
• Termination process is outlined for the agreement. However, the agreement needs to be updated as it is 12 years old.
• The areas of a typical school district/city partnership that are missing include:
o Operating details on how the permitting process is done and if conflicts arise how to deal with them.
o Who does what in the partnership?
o Key issues that can create conflict and how to deal with them.
o There is no costing outline of what each partner is contributing into the partnership.
o The agreement does not identify how space will be dealt with on an equitable level.
o No endowment is established in the partnership agreement for each partner to invest into the partnership to
create revenue to offset operational costs or capital needs.
o Not key performance indicators are identified to outline and track how the partnership impacts efficiency and
effectiveness of the partnerships involved to demonstrate fairness.
COMMUNITY CULTURAL CENTER AND BROOKINGS ART COUNCIL
The third partnership agreement reviewed was between the City of Brookings as owner of the Community Cultural Center and
Brookings Arts Council for the use and operation of the Community Cultural Center and review of it as follows:
• The agreement has a recital and general purpose for what the partnership includes and who does what in the partnership.
• The partnership agreement outlines who owns the building and what are the responsibilities of both partners in the
agreement.
• The partnership agreement identifies who is responsible for managing the agreement between the two parties.
• The partnership agreement outlines who is responsible to provide overall operation and maintenance of the facility.
• The partnership agreement outlines that the City is responsible for capital improvements of the facility where the Cultural
Center is located as well as the routine maintenance.
• The insurance requirements are identified for both parties.
• The agreement is to expire in five years, but it has not been renewed and is six years.
• No reporting process is outlined in the partnership agreement.
• No outline of costs to operate the facility or to maintain on an annual basis it is outlined in the agreement.
• No endowment is set up to help fund the capital costs of the facility on an annual basis.
• There are no key performance indicators outlined in the partnership agreement that delineate what the outcomes are
being achieved by the Art Council on an annual basis.
Partnership and Policy Analysis
Parks and Recreation Master Plan
3
• There is not an established way to demonstrate what the city is putting into the building cost and what the arts council
is investing in programs and services in the building.
BROOKINGS ACTIVITY CENTER
Fourth Partnership Agreement evaluated was between the City of Brookings and the Brookings Activity Center and review of it as
follows:
• The Brookings Activity Center is essentially a senior center. The building is owned by the City of Brookings and the
Activity Center provides recreational and social activities including nutritional meals.
• The partnership agreement is an ongoing agreement with no termination date but requires a 180-day notice should the
Activity Center decide it does not want to provide services in that building for the future.
• The City is responsible for the cost of improvements to the building, ongoing maintenance and outside maintenance
surrounding the building. Minor improvements such as furnace filters, light bulbs and minor plumbing are the
responsibility of the Activity Center. The Brookings Activity Center is responsible for the utilities of the building as well
as the insurance for personal contents in the building and liability insurance.
• The Brookings Activity Center is responsible for the janitorial costs of the building, as well as the supplies and equipment
needed in the building.
• The Brookings Activity Center is responsible for the staffing of the facility and the programs provided.
• All interior improvements are the responsibility of the Activity Center Inc.
• The furniture, contents, and equipment including kitchen and food preparation equipment and supplies shall be owned
by the user and the city shall have no responsibility for providing or replacing these items.
• The food service contract is a joint contract with a service provider and the contract can only be cancelled with the city
and the Activity Center agreeing to so.
• The partnership agreement does not include any expectations of what the Activity Center should provide in services to
seniors age 60+. No point of contact is listed in the agreement. No reporting process to either party is outlined in the
agreement. No budget is established or reported as part of the agreement. No key performance indicators are
established by either party. These elements should be established in future agreements.
FISHBACK SOCCER PARK
Fifth partnership agreement reviewed between Fishback Soccer Park Operating Agreement between South Dakota State University
and the City of Brookings and review of it as follows:
• The operating agreement does not have a recital intention at the start of the agreement on why the agreement is in
place to begin with, but it does reference intention of what both parties desire.
• The operating agreement outlines what each partner will provide in permit compensation to the city of $3,400 annually
and what the City will provide in terms of facility access use for practices, games and tournaments, as well as the
maintenance of the field, lighting utility costs with the exception of demand charges when a game is played in prime
utility costing time and the field maintenance cost the city will provide for the grounds and buildings. No true costing is
established for what the split between the City and University is and how much the City is subsidizing the use for the
University beyond the $3,400 the University pays now. This should be a priority in the phase two portion of the
agreement.
• Operational details and upgrades improvements are outlined, but not costed out annually.
Partnership and Policy Analysis
Parks and Recreation Master Plan
4
• Joint recognition for both the city and the University is not outlined in the agreement for the investment the City is
making on behalf of the University.
• A flow chart of communications is indicated in the agreement, but not attached.
• Termination dates are established in two separate 10-year phases with the second phase being updated beginning in
2022.
• No key performance indicators are listed on how to measure the success of the partnership agreement for efficiency and
or effectiveness.
BROOKINGS ICE SKATING ASSOCIATION
Sixth partnership agreement reviewed includes the Larson Ice Center and the Brookings Ice Skating Association (BISA) for the use
and operation of the Larson Ice Center for the period of one year from July 31, 2020, to July 30th, 2021 and review of it as follows.
• A recital and general purpose of the agreement is stated.
• The agreement is for one year.
• The agreement outlines what BISA does for use of the facility, as one of three major partners of the facility.
• The point of contacts on who is responsible for managing the agreement is outlined.
• The roles and responsibilities of the agreement are identified in the agreement. No budget numbers by either party are
stated for their level of investment in each other of the facility, with the exception of the ice fee which is stated at
$70,500 or $140 for ice time. The true cost of ice time is not stated in the agreement.
• The operational uses by BISA are identified in the agreement on who does what and why as it applies to access, cleaning
of space, use of certain spaces in the building and time of year of use.
• Programs are outlined in the agreement on what BISA will provide in the building.
• Point of contacts for both parties are identified and for resolving conflict between each party on elements of use in the
building. The termination date and insurances that BISA is to provide are identified.
• No existing operational budget is stated for the arena and what share BISA is responsible for in the agreement.
• The City’s role in providing ice skating lessons, open skate times and other services are stated clearly but not an
operating budget to provide those services.
• A staffing organizational chart on who provides what and why is not attached in the agreement with phone numbers and
email addresses.
• No key performance indicators are identified in the agreement to demonstrate efficiency and effectiveness of the facility
and of each organization support in the building.
BEST PRACTICES IN CREATING A PARTNERSHIP POLICY
Creating a partnership policy involves the following process and it is recommended that the Department classify their partnerships
as public/public partnerships, public/private partnerships and public/not-for-profit partnerships. In each case, the Department
should consider following these recommendations for each type of partnership and include a checklist of items to include in the
partnership.
ESTABLISH A VISION STATEMENT AND PURPOSE FOR PARTNERSHIPS
Partnership and Policy Analysis
Parks and Recreation Master Plan
5
“The Vision for Brookings Parks and Recreation Department is to provide high quality parks, recreation facilities and programs that
citizens and visitors desire and will support financially that creates a community of choice to live, work and play now and for future
generations.”
PURPOSE
This policy is designed to guide the process for Brookings Parks and Recreation in their desire to partner with private, non-profit,
or other governmental entities for the development, design, construction and/or operation of possibly partnered recreational
facilities and/or programs that may occur on Brookings Parks and Recreation owned or leased property.
A major component in exploring any potential partnership will be to identify collaborating partners that may help provide a
synergistic working relationship in terms of resources, community contributions, knowledge, and political sensitivity. These
partnerships should be mutually beneficial for all proposing partners including Brookings Parks and Recreation, and particularly
beneficial for the citizens of Brookings.
ISSUES ADDRESSED.
Brookings Parks and Recreation has developed partnerships over many years that have helped to support the management of parks
and recreation facilities and programs services, while also providing educational and recreational opportunities for the citizens of
Brookings. The recommended policy will promote fairness and equity within the existing and future partnerships while helping staff
to manage against what may cause conflicts internally and externally. Certain partnership principles must be adopted by Brookings
Parks and Recreation Parks Board for existing and future partnerships to work effectively. These partnership principles are as
follows:
• All partnerships will require an upfront presentation to the Brookings Parks and Recreation and Parks Board that
describes the reason for creation of the partnership and establishes an outcome that benefits each partner’s
involvement.
• All partnerships will require a working agreement with measurable outcomes that hold each partner accountable to the
outcomes desired and to each other and will be evaluated on a yearly basis with reports back to the Parks Board on the
outcomes of the partnership and how equitable the partnership remains.
• All partnerships will track direct and indirect costs associated with the partnership investment to demonstrate the level
of equity each partner is investing.
• Each partner will not treat one another as a client‐to‐client relationship but will create a partnership culture that focuses
on planning together on a yearly basis or as appropriate; communicating weekly/or monthly on how the partnership is
working; and annually reporting to each other’s board or owners on how well the partnership is working and the results
of their efforts to the taxpayers of Brookings.
• Full disclosure by both partners to each other will be made available when issues arise.
• Annual informing of each other’s staff on the respective partner’s values and yearly goals and work plans so both
partners are in‐tune with issues the partners may be dealing with that could affect the partnership policy or agreement
as it applies to finances, staffing, capital costs, political elements, or changes in operating philosophies.
PARTNERSHIP REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT:
Each partnership Agreement must have these elements in the agreement between the city and the partner involved:
• The partnership must have a recital that is stated at the start of the partnership agreement that outlines the purpose
and intention of the partnership.
• What does the partnership consist of is stated?
Partnership and Policy Analysis
Parks and Recreation Master Plan
6
• Who does what in the partnership agreement?
• What are the key issues we are trying to address or resolve in the partnership agreement?
• Operational details outlined in the agreement on who does what, why and to what level.
• What programs will be provided?
• How will each partner address joint recognition in the partnership agreement?
• Who will be the point of contact and the email and phone number contacts stated?
• Communications expectation outlined for both partners involved.
• The Director of each organization will be the representative over the partnership agreement.
• A termination date is stated.
• Reporting process is outlined at the end of each year.
• Staff cost will be stated on what each partner is spending to support the partnership in place on a yearly basis.
• The space to be allocated and how it will be shared between the city and the partner.
• Establish of a funding Endowment if necessary to cover ongoing cost associate with the capital costs to operate and
maintain a facility.
• What will be the key performance measures that will track and demonstrate the outcomes desired?
• A business plan may be required based on the level of money involved and the level of impact required including an
operational proforma updated yearly.
• Cost of service will be updated yearly for what each partner is spending on the partnership annually.
• Establish a working operational diagram on how the partnership will function based on the expectations of the
partnership agreement.
EXPECTED OUTCOMES AND B ENEFITS
• Increased visibility
• Increase in services and programs.
• Tax dollars spent on services are maximized through collaboration.
• Public believes in and supports the role of Brookings Parks and Recreation in partnerships
• Promotes a positive image.
• Public involvement enriches their understanding of Brookings Parks and Recreation
• Engaged public enhances current and future development of programs and facilities.
• Provides alternatives for manpower, recreation sites, financial resources, supplies, materials, etc. for a more
comprehensive system.
• Shared vision and goals
• Allow us the opportunity to make a vision a reality.
• Reach more people, provide more services, reduce expenditures, and generate more revenue.
Partnership and Policy Analysis
Parks and Recreation Master Plan
7
• Eliminates duplication of efforts, strengthen communities, and achieve greater outcomes.
TYPES OF PARNTERSHIPS
PUBLIC/PUBLIC PARTNERSHIPS
The policy for public/public partnerships is evident with Brookings Parks and Recreation based on their working with other agencies
such as schools, and other municipal services in the area. Working together on the development, sharing, and/or operating, parks
and recreation facilities and programs will be as follows:
• Each partner will meet with the Brookings Parks and Recreation Board and staff annually to plan and share activity‐
based costs and equity invested by each partner in the partnership.
• Partners will establish measurable outcomes and work through key issues to focus on for the coming year between each
partner to meet the outcomes desired.
• Each partner will focus on meeting a balance of 50% equity for each agreed‐to partnership and track investment costs
accordingly.
• Each partner will assign a liaison to serve each partnership agency for communication and planning purposes.
• Measurable outcomes will be reviewed quarterly or annually and shared with each partner, with adjustments made as
needed.
• Each partner will act as an agent for the other partner, thinking collectively as one, not two separate agencies for
purposes of the agreement.
• Each partner will meet with the other partner’s respective board or owner annually, to share results of the partnership
agreement.
• A working partnership agreement will be developed and monitored together on a quarterly or as needed basis.
• If conflicts arise between partners, the Director of Brookings Parks and Recreation along with the other public agency’s
highest-ranking officer will meet to resolve the partnership issue. It should be resolved at the highest level, or the
partnership will be dissolved.
• No exchange of money between partners will be made until the end of the partnership year. A running credit will be
established that can be settled at the end of the planning year with one check or will be carried over to the following
year as a credit with adjustments made to the working agreement to meet the 50% equity level desired.
PUBLIC/NOT-FOR-PROFIT PARTNERSHIPS
The partnership policy for public/not-for-profit partnerships with Brookings Parks and Recreation and the not-for-profit community
of service providers is seen in associations working together in the development and management of facilities and programs within
the Brookings Parks and Recreation system. These principles are as follows:
• The not-for-profit partner agency or group involved with Brookings Parks and Recreation must first recognize that they
are in a partnership with the Department to provide a public service or good; conversely, the Department must manage
the partnership in the best interest of the community as a whole, not in the best interest of the not-for-profit agency.
• The partnership working agreement will be year-to-year and evaluated based on the outcomes determined for the
partnership agencies or groups during the planning process at the start of the partnership year. At the planning
workshop, each partner will share their needs for the partnership and outcomes desired. Each partner will outline their
level of investment in the partnership as it applies to money, people, time, equipment, and the amount of capital
investment they will make in the partnership for the coming year.
Partnership and Policy Analysis
Parks and Recreation Master Plan
8
• Each partner will focus on meeting a balance of 50% equity or as negotiated and agreed upon as established in the
planning session with Brookings Parks and Recreation. Each partner will demonstrate to the other the method each will
use to track costs, and how it will be reported on a monthly basis, and any revenue earned.
• Each partner will appoint a liaison to serve each partnering agency for communication purposes.
• Measurable outcomes will be reviewed quarterly and shared with each partner, with adjustments made, as needed.
• Each partner will act as an agent for the other partner to think collectively as one, not two separate agencies. Items such
as financial information will be shared if requested by either partner when requested to support a better understanding
of the resources available to the partnership.
• Each partner will meet the other’s respective board on a yearly basis to share results of the partnership agreement.
• If conflicts should arise during the partnership year, the Brookings Parks and Recreation Director and the highest-ranking
officer of the not- for-profit agency will meet to resolve the issue.
• It should be resolved at this level, or the partnership will be dissolved. No other course of action will be allowed by
either partner.
• Financial payments by the not-for-profit agency will be made monthly to Brookings Parks and Recreation as outlined in
the working agreement to meet the 50% equity level of the partnership.
PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS
The policy for public/private partnerships is relevant to Brookings Parks and Recreation and includes businesses, private groups,
private associations, or individuals who desires to make a profit from use of Department facilities or programs. It would also be
evident if the business, group, association, or individual wishes to develop a facility on park property, to provide a service on
Department‐owned property, or who has a contract with the Department to provide a task or service on the Department’s owned
facilities. The partnership principles are as follows:
• Upon entering into an agreement with a private business, group, association or individual, Brookings Parks and
Recreation Board and staff must recognize that they must allow that entity to make a profit.
• In developing a public/private partnership, the Brookings Parks and Recreation Board and staff, as well as the private
partner will enjoy a designated fee from the contracting agency, or a designated fee plus a percentage of gross dollars
less sales tax on a monthly, quarterly, or yearly basis, as outlined in the contract agreement.
• In developing a public/private partnership, the Brookings Parks and Recreation Board and staff, as well as contracted
partners will establish a set of measurable outcomes to be achieved. A tracking method of those outcomes will be
established and monitored by Brookings Parks and Recreation Staff and Board. The outcomes will include standards of
quality, financial reports, customer satisfaction, payments to the Department, and overall coordination with the
Department for the services rendered.
• Depending on the level of investment made by the private contractor, the partnership agreement can be limited to
months, a year, or multiple years.
• The private contractor will provide on a yearly basis a working management plan they will follow to ensure the outcomes
desired by the Brookings Parks and Recreation Board and staff to achieve the goals of the partnership set out in the
partnership recital. The work management plan can and will be negotiated, if necessary. Monitoring of the work
management plan will be the responsibility of both partners. The Brookings Parks and Recreation Board and staff must
allow the contractor to operate freely in their best interest, as long as the outcomes are achieved.
Partnership and Policy Analysis
Parks and Recreation Master Plan
9
• The Department has the right to advertise for private contracted partnership services or negotiate on an individual basis
with a bid process based on the professional level of the service to be provided.
• If conflicts arise between both partners, the Director of Brookings Parks and Recreation and the highest ranked officer
from the other partnership will try to resolve the issue before going to each partner’s legal councils. If none can be
achieved, the partnership shall be dissolved.
THE PARTNERING PROCESS OUTLINE
The steps for the creation of a partnership with Brookings Parks and Recreation are as follows:
• Brookings Parks and Recreation will create a public notification process that will help inform any and all interested
partners of the availability of partnerships with Brookings Parks and Recreation. This will be done through notification
in area newspapers, listing in the brochure, or through any other notification method that is feasible.
• The proposing partner takes the first step to propose partnering with Brookings Parks and Recreation. To help in
reviewing both the partnerships proposed, and the project to be developed in partnership, Brookings Parks and
Recreation asks for a Preliminary Proposal according to a specific format. If initial review of a Preliminary Proposal
yields interest and appears to be mutually beneficial based on Brookings Parks and Recreation Mission and Goals, and
the Selection Criteria, a Brookings Parks and Recreation staff person or appointed representative will be assigned to
work with potential partners.
• The Brookings Parks and Recreation representative is available to answer questions related to the creation of an initial
proposal, and after initial interest has been indicated, will work with the proposing partner to create a checklist of what
actions need to take place next. Each project will have distinctive planning, design, review, and support issues. The
Brookings Parks and Recreation representative will facilitate the process of determining how the partnership will address
these issues. This representative can also facilitate approvals and input from any involved Brookings Parks and
Recreation staff member, providing guidance for the partners as to necessary steps.
• An additional focus at this point will be determining whether this project is appropriate for additional collaborative
partnering, and whether this project should prompt Brookings Parks and Recreation to seek a Request for Proposal (RFP)
from competing/ collaborating organizations.
• Request for Proposal (RFP) Trigger: In order to reduce concerns of unfair private competition, if a proposed project
involves partnering with a private "for profit" entity and a dollar amount greater than $5,000, and Brookings Parks and
Recreation has not already undergone a public process for solicitation of that particular type of partnership, then
Brookings Parks and Recreation will request Partnership Proposals from other interested private entities for identical
and/or complementary facilities, programs or services. A selection of appropriate partners will be part of the process.
• For most projects, a Formal Proposal from the partners for their desired development project will need to be presented
for the Brookings Parks and Recreations official development review processes and approvals. The project may require
approval by the Legal Counsel of the City.
• Depending on project complexity and anticipated benefits, responsibilities for all action points are negotiable, within the
framework established by law, to assure the most efficient and mutually beneficial outcome. Some projects may require
that all technical and professional expertise and staff resources come from outside the Brookings Parks and Recreation
staff, while some projects may proceed most efficiently if Brookings Parks and Recreation contributes staff resources to
the partnership.
• The partnership must cover the costs the partnership incurs, regardless of how the partnered project is staffed, and
reflect those costs in its project proposal and budget. The proposal for the partnered project should also discuss how
Partnership and Policy Analysis
Parks and Recreation Master Plan
10
staffing and expertise will be provided, and what documents will be produced. If Brookings Parks and Recreation staff
resources are to be used by the partnership, those costs should be allocated to the partnered project and charged to it.
• Specific Partnership Agreements appropriate to the project will be drafted jointly. There is no specifically prescribed
format for Partnership Agreements, which may take any of several forms depending on what will accomplish the desired
relationships among partners. The agreements may be in the form of:
o Lease Agreements
o Management and/or Operating Agreements
o Maintenance Agreements
o Intergovernmental Agreements (IGAs)
o Or a combination of these and/or other appropriate agreements
• Proposed partnership agreements might include oversight of the development of the partnership, concept plans and
project master plans, environmental assessments, architectural designs, development and design review, project
management, and construction documents, inspections, contracting, monitoring, etc. Provision to fund the costs and for
reimbursing Brookings Parks and Recreation for its costs incurred in creating the partnership, facilitating the project’s
passage through the Development Review Processes, and completing the required documents should be considered.
• If all is approved, the Partnership begins. Brookings Parks and Recreation is committed to upholding its responsibilities
to Partners from the initiation through the continuation of a partnership. Evaluation will be an integral component of all
Partnerships. The agreements should outline who is responsible for evaluation; the types of measures used, and detail
what will occur should the evaluations reveal Partners are not meeting their Partnership obligations.
PARTNERSHIP SUCCESS FACTORS BY BRIAN O’NEILL NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVANCY DIRECTOR
• Focus on important needs of both partners involved.
• Make the partnership a win-win.
• Adopt a shared vision.
• Negotiate a formal agreement.
• Ensure good communication.
• Ensure the partnership is owned by your whole organization.
• Maintain an environment of trust,
• Leave your ego and control at the door.
• Understand each partners’ mission and organizational culture.
• Use the strengths of each partner.
• Find ways through the red tape.
• Build step by step.
• Strive for excellence.
• Diversify your funding sources.
• Constantly seek out and adopt best practices.
Partnership and Policy Analysis
Parks and Recreation Master Plan
11
• Always be courteous and diplomatic.
• Honor your commitments.
• Celebrate success.
• Respect the right to disagree. Act on a consensus basis.
• Network and build relationships.
• Put mechanisms in place to reinforce the partnership.
Project Description
Total Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Total Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Total Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Total Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Total Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Total Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Total Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Total Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Total Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Total Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Visionary
Investment Total Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Visionary
Investment
Vehicles and Equipment
Replace Forestry Dump truck $90,000 $90,000 $200,000 $200,000
Replace 2016 Chipper $70,000 $70,000
Replace 2014 Forestry Loader $150,000 $150,000
Recreation - Registration Software $30,000 $30,000
Replace Hustler 4600 Mower $55,000 $55,000
Replace Toro mower $65,000 $65,000
Replace Fleet Pick-Up Trucks 1 each year $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000
Replace 2019 Kromer Field Commander $28,000 $28,000
Replace 2012 3320 John Deere Tractor $37,000 $37,000
Replace 2013 Hustler 104 Mower $25,000 $25,000
Replace 2011 John Deere 3320 $55,000 $55,000
Replace old Bobcat $70,000 $70,000 $45,000 $45,000
Bobcat Toolcat replacement $55,000 $55,000
Total Vehicles and Equipment $127,000 $90,000 $90,000 $125,000 $100,000 $90,000 $105,000 $213,000 $35,000 $70,000 $280,000
Park Facility Renovations/ Improvements
Expanded Services Alternative - Splash Park $250,000 $250,000
Expanded Services Alternative - Community Garden Site II $100,000 $100,000
Arrowhead Park - North Pond Renovation $320,000 $320,000
Arrowhead Park - Fishing Pond Renovation $370,000 $370,000
Dakota Nature Park - Resealing of Exterior Wood $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000
Dakota Nature Park - Resealing of Interior Wood $25,000 $25,000
Dakota Nature Park - Trail Repairs $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000
Dakota Nature Park - Parking Expansion $175,000 $175,000
Dwiggins-Medary Park - Skatepark Equipment Replacement $75,000 $75,000
Fishback Soccer Complex - Press Box Leveling $28,000 $28,000
Fishback Soccer Complex - Add Playground $200,000 $200,000
Fishback Soccer Complex - Add Internal Trails $179,200 $179,200
Hillcrest Aquatic Center - Refinish quartz pool surface $125,000 $125,000
Hillcrest Aquatic Center - New filter system - main pool $215,000 $215,000
Hillcrest Aquatic Center - Alter perimeter recirculation system $40,000 $40,000
Hillcrest Aquatic Center - New filter system - Leisure Pool $155,000 $155,000
Hillcrest Park - Tennis Court Re-Surfacing/Repair
Hillcrest Park - West lots - paving $400,000 $400,000
Larson Park - Trail Lighting $125,000 $125,000
Moriarty Park - Add Trail Loop Connection (North End)$35,000 $35,000
Outdoor Sports Court - Repair/Replace/Resurface $75,000 $75,000
Arrowhead Park - Court Reconstruction
Indian Hills Park - Court Re-Surfacing/Repair
Larson Park - Basketball Court Resurfacing
Lions Park - Basketball Court Renovation and Access
McClemans Park - Basketball Court Resurfacing
Moriarty Park - Basketball Court Resurfacing
Southside Park - Basketball Court Resurfacing
Playground Replacement
Arrowhead Park $155,000 $155,000
Hillcrest Park (access & surfacing), Little Tykes (4 sites) $240,000 $240,000
Lions Park $170,000 $170,000
McClemans Park $140,000 $140,000
Sarah Renae $140,000 $140,000
Moriarty Park $250,000 $250,000
Pheasant Nest/Bark Park - Turf Improvements $16,800 $16,800
Pioneer Park - Improve South Walking Paths $40,000 $40,000
Pioneer Park - Add Park Accent Lighting $20,000 $20,000
Southside Park - Field Lighting $150,000 $150,000
Sexauer Park - Sand VB Edge Improvements $15,600 $15,600
Sexauer Park - Campground Road and Parking $95,000 $95,000
Sexauer Park - New Dog Park $120,000 $120,000
Sexauer Park - Campground Resurface/Reseal/Striping $95,000 $95,000
Southbrook Softball Complex - Sidewalk Additions $35,000 $35,000
Southbrook Softball Complex - Parking Improvements $500,000 $500,000 $340,000 $340,000
Parks Shop - Roof Repair $25,000 $25,000
Parks Shop - Addition $600,000 $600,000
Parks Maint Shop/Sheds - Replace/Repair 50% Exterior Doors $64,500 $64,500
5th Street Gym - Exterior Brick Repair $40,000 $40,000
5th Street Gym - Roof replacement, Gutters $175,000 $175,000
5th Street Gym - Replace Air Handler System $600,000 $600,000
Total Park Facility Renovations $523,000 $695,600 $694,500 $455,000 $395,000 $474,200 $406,800 $900,000 $920,000 $890,000 $765,000
Activity Center
Activity Center - Replace 50% of carpet $35,000 $35,000
Activity Center - Exterior Windows $25,000 $25,000
Activity Center - Make Fire system ADA compliant $25,000 $25,000
Activity Center - Replace panel L,LK,MDP,LKD and Switchboards $141,500 $141,500
Activity Center - Interior lighting to LED
Activity Center - Replace sprinkler system $41,250 $41,250
Activity Center - Replace HVAC wall controls $25,000 $25,000
Activity Center - Replace rooftop units $411,925 $411,925
Activity Center - Replace exterior lighting to LED
Activity Center - Replace HVAC exhaust fans $27,650 $27,650
Total Activity Center $25,000 $141,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $453,175 $0 $62,650 $0 $50,000
Larson Ice Arena
Replace rubber flooring $70,000 $70,000 $50,000
Replace Zamboni $130,000 $130,000 $130,000 $130,000
Re build east parking lot
Main Parking area - seal and paint $60,000 $60,000
Exterior windows $38,600 $38,600
Red/Blue Rink - Dehumidification Unit $450,000 $450,000
Generator maintenance $41,800 $41,800
Main Electrical room - replace pumps P1 - P8 $43,350 $43,350
Replace HVAC controls equipment as needed $200,000 $200,000
Main Vestibule - replace Fire Detection/Alarm system $222,750 $222,750
Replace 50% exterior doors $60,000 $60,000
Repair/patch exterior stucco walls $100,000 $100,000
Replace exterior security cameras and components $64,350 $64,350
Red Rink - Replace make-up air unit - RR #1A $55,350 $55,350
Main electrical room - replace water heater $25,400 $25,400
Main electrical room - replace boiler $36,650 $36,650
Red Rink - replace radiant heating system $53,000 $53,000
Replace Rooftop units 1-9 $380,300 $380,300
Repair/patch 25% exterior paving $141,900 $141,900
Repair roofing membrane $89,100 $89,100
Main electrical room - replace unit heaters $23,000 $23,000
Red Rink - replace MAU duct heaters $82,000 $82,000
Total Larson Ice Arena $60,000 $108,600 $450,000 $285,150 $447,100 $822,600 $89,100 $105,000 $0 $0 $130,000
Project Description
Total
Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Total
Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Total
Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Total
Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Total
Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Total
Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Total
Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Total
Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Total
Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Total
Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Visionary
Investment Total
Critical/
Sustainable
Alternative
Expanded
Services
Alternative
Visionary
Investment
Golf Course
Irrigation Replacement $1,500,000 $1,500,000
Sediment Removal - Irrigation Holding Ponds $150,000 $150,000
Additional cart paths $50,000 $50,000 $35,000 $35,000
Golf Updates $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000
Tee & Fringe Mower $45,000 $45,000 $100,000 $100,000 $45,000 $45,000
Fairway Mowers $95,000 $95,000 $100,000 $100,000 $95,000 $95,000
20322027202820292030203120222023202420252026
2032202220232024
Parks, Golf Course, Ice Arena and Senior Center Capital Improvement Plan
10-Year Capital Improvement Plan5-Year Capital Improvement Plan
2031203020292028202720252026
Replace 2011 JD Zero Turn Mower $30,000 $30,000
Replace 2006 Ford Ranger Pick-Up $25,000 $25,000 $30,000 $30,000
Replace 2012 Toro Workman Utility $27,000 $27,000
Replace 2012 Smithco Bunker Rake $27,000 $27,000
Sweeper Vac $50,000 $50,000
Replace 2012 JD Zero Turn Mower $30,000 $30,000
Replace 2014 Toro workman $28,000 $28,000
Replace 2- 2015 JD gators $36,000 $36,000
Replace 2015 smithco sprayer $70,000 $70,000
Replace 2- Toro greens mowers $110,000 $110,000
Replace 2007 Dodge pickup w/plow $35,000 $35,000
Replace Toro 5900 rough mower $140,000 $140,000
Replace 2- Toro tee and fringe mowers $110,000 $110,000
Replace toro trap rake $35,000 $35,000
Replace Toro Top Dresser $25,000 $25,000
Replace Toro Tee mower $55,000 $55,000
Edgebrook Golf Course - Executive Course Improvements $150,000 $150,000
Wall Packs and Parking Lot lighting to LED (Possible Grant Funding)
Interior LED lighting replacement (Possible Grant Funding)
HVAC Condensing Units $44,700 $44,700
Interior Flooring - Carpet and Vinyl $36,000 $36,000
Exterior Concrete Replacement / 50% Lot sealing $133,100 $133,100
Total Golf Course $80,000 $134,000 $90,000 $278,000 $216,000 $308,100 $189,700 $215,000 $1,686,000 $280,000 $140,000
Tree Planting
Tree Planting program $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000
Total Tree Planting $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $0
Master Bike Plan/Bikeways/Trails/Main
Parks Master Plan Update $30,000 $30,000
Trail Repairs - In Engineering Budget
Total MBP/Bikeways/Trails/Main $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $30,000
Public Art
Public Art $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $61,569 $61,569
Total Public Art $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $61,569
Total Capital Outlay $910,000 $1,264,700 $1,419,500 $1,238,150 $1,253,100 $1,789,900 $1,338,775 $1,528,000 $2,798,650 $1,335,000 $1,456,569
Pioneer Park - Add Public WiFi Access $10,000 $10,000
Larson Park - Add Public WiFi Access $10,000 $10,000
Hillcrest Park - Add Public WiFi Access $10,000 $10,000
Operational Budget Items
Pioneer Park - Band Shell Interior Repairs $10,000 $10,000
Moriarty Park - Basketball Court ADA Access $1,200 $1,200
Camelot Park - ADA Access Path to Play Equipment $2,500 $2,500
Hillcrest Park - Remove Existing Basketball $8,500 $8,500
Hillcrest Park - Add Permanent Cornhole Boards $6,000 $6,000
Hillcrest Park - Add Food Truck Accommodations $12,500 $12,500
Sexauer Park - Update Park Signage $15,000 $15,000
Southbrook Softball Complex - Interior Landscape Improvements $15,000 $15,000
Total Operational Budget Items $24,500 $18,700 $27,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Donor Driven Projects (Visionary Investments)
Expanded Services Alternative - Pickleball 6 Court Complex $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000
Dakota Nature Park - Expand Single Track $15,000 $15,000
Edgebrook - Pay to Play Disc Golf $12,000 $12,000
Lions Park - Update Park Signage $15,000 $15,000
McClemans Park - Update Park Signage $15,000 $15,000
Larson Park - Group Shelter Pavilion $250,000 $250,000 $200,000 $200,000
Larson Park - Fountain $80,000 $80,000
Larson Park - Outdoor Offices $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000
McClemans Park Shelter $50,000 $50,000
Northbrook Park Community Gardens - Add Single-Track Trails $15,000 $15,000
Northbrook Park Community Gardens - Add 18-Hole Disc Golf $17,000 $17,000
Southbrook Softball Complex - Add Playground Equipment $220,000 $220,000
Total Donor Driven Projects $45,000 $262,000 $360,000 $220,000 $250,000 $297,000 $15,000 $0 $0 $0 $0
Desired Projects (Visionary Investments)
Connected Bike Trail System $2,500,000
Expanded Services - Indoor Community/Recreation Center (Location TBD) $30,000,000
Expanded Services - New Sledding Hill (Location TBD) $175,000
Expanded Services - Add Miracle Field (Location TBD)$756,000
Expanded Services - Add Ballfields (4) (Location TBD)$2,500,000
Northbrook Park Community Gardens - Add Campground $960,000
Larson - Exterior LED $150,000
Larson - Interior LED $297,000
Total Desired Projects $37,338,000
City of Brookings
Staff Report
Brookings City & County
Government Center, 520
Third Street
Brookings, SD 57006
(605) 692-6281 phone
(605) 692-6907 fax
File #:ID 21-0503,Version:1
Presentation, Discussion, and Possible Action on the 2022 Outside Agency Application.
Summary:
In 2021, a new process assisted in determining proper funding for agencies that addressed
community needs. The City Council's direction is desired for the development of the 2023 funding
rubric.
Once approved, the United Way will receive applications this fall and provide Council with a
recommendation. The City Council will make the final determination of funding for 2022 in
January/February.
Recommendation:
This item is presented in a work session for further discussion. City Council’s direction will provide
United Way with a greater understanding of the City’s priorities for social service needs. Council will
make the ultimate decision in January/February for agency funding allocations.
Attachments:
Memo
2021 Funding Recommendation
United Way Rubric
City of Brookings Printed on 10/15/2021Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
City Council Work Session Memo
From: Paul M. Briseno, City Manager
Council Meeting: October 19, 2021
Subject: 2022 Outside Agency Application
Person(s) Responsible: Paul M. Briseno, City Manager
Summary:
In 2021 a new process assisted in determining proper funding for agencies that
addressed community needs. The City Council's direction is desired for the
development of the 2023 funding rubric.
Once approved, the United Way will receive applications this fall and provide Council
with a recommendation. The City Council will make the final determination of funding for
2022 in January/February.
Background:
Annually, the City Council grants funds to Brookings social service agencies. The City
Council determines available funds through the traditional budget process. Last year,
the City Council approved a new procedure. Council augmented the original $226,500
budget with an additional $40,000 returned from non-profit agencies. The United Way
recommended $266,500 in funding for 2021, and Council approved.
This fall, United Way will accept social service agency applications. Any agency can
apply for United Way and/or City funding from a shared process. The United Way
committee will utilize the application, rubric, and Council priorities to provide a
recommendation. The City Council will then provide final approval and allocations in
January/February.
Schedule
Oct/Nov Council Set Priorities for Rubric
Dec/Jan United Way Receive and Evaluate Applications
Jan United Way Submits Community Impact Report
Jan/Feb United Way Recommends and Council Determines Allocations
Item Details:
The United Way has asked the City Council to give direction for prioritization. The
direction will assist in determining if a new rubric is needed and clarification for city
funding recommendations to the committee. The United Way utilizes a rubric that
prioritizes the three areas within statements noted below:
Health – Individuals and families are healthy and safe
Education – Individuals and families are equipped for success throughout every life
stage
Self Sufficiency – Individuals and families are independent and stable
The 2022 recommended budget contains $240,000 for social service agencies. This is
an increase from the 2021 budget. Last year Council prioritized:
Affordable Housing
Youth Development
Diversity
Government Stewardship
Health
Safety
Transportation/Transit
City Staff and the United Way asks the City Council to determine prioritized areas for
social service funding.
Staff assumes a second pool of funding may occur from the American Recovery Plan
(ARPA). In December or January, a recommendation for social service agency
allocations from this funding source will be made. These dollars should be targeted for
COVID-related impacts.
Legal Consideration:
None.
Financial Consideration:
The 2022 recommended funding for social service is $240,000.
Options and Recommendation:
This item is presented in a work session for further discussion. City Council’s direction
will provide United Way with a greater understanding of the City’s priorities for social
service needs. Council will make the ultimate decision in January/February for agency
funding allocation.
Supporting Documentation:
1. 2021 Funding Recommendation
2. United Way Rubric
Amount funded 2020 $195,500
Amount funding 2021 $266,486
% Increase 36%
Agency Allocations 2020 $195,000
Agency Requests 2021 $295,000
% Increase 51%
Agency Name/Program Impact Area 2020 Funding 2021 Agency
Funding Request
2021 Adjusted
Request
2021 Funding
Recommendation
BATA Transportation $95,000 $115,000 $115,000 $115,000
Boys and Girls Club Youth Development $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000
Brookings Crime Stoppers Safety $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000
Brookings Empowerment Project Health $2,500 $4,000 $2,500 $2,500
East Central CASA Health $0 $5,000 $5,000 $3,000
Brookings Activity Center Partnership $0 $5,000 $5,000 $0
Brookings County Youth Mentoring Youth Development $6,000 $8,000 $8,000 $7,000
Helpline Center Health $0 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000
Brookings Behavioral Health & Wellness Health $15,000 $25,000 $25,000 $20,000
Brookings Backpack Program Health $0 $25,000 $25,000 $20,000
Brookings Area Habitat for Humanity Housing $0 $30,000 $30,000 $21,000
$195,500 $295,000 $293,500 $266,500
99.49%
Application Funding Process and Worksheet Narrative
1
Rev 12/19
The proposed agency funding determination process in brief: More detail is provided in the narrative below.
1. Application review (Group scoring submitted, Date December 2021)
2. Application data entry (Executive Director, Date December 2021)
3. Full Board discussion (BAUW Board ALLOCATION meeting – Date January 2022)
4. Recommendations of funding provided to City Manager (Executive Director, Date January 2022)
City of Brookings funding area priorities as voted on by City Council. This was used in 2021 application process:
Affordable Housing
Youth Development
Diversity
*Education& Literacy
*Environment
Government Stewardship
Health
Safety
Transportation/Transit
*Arts/Culture
*Economic Development
*Preservation/History
The areas *noted have separate department or special revenue funding identified throughout the budget.
The proposed agency funding determination process in detail:
Application review (UW Board Review, Date December 2021)
Gather as a group to read/discuss the groups applications. The group should reach out to the agency contacts to
clarify any questions in order to fully understand and assess the application.
Rating Meaning Rating Meaning
1 Fails to meet expectations 6 Meets expectations
3 Lacking in expectations 9 Exceeds expectations
The six assessment areas are weighted differently to reflect their relative importance. Community Impact,
Community Need, and Fits BAUW Priorities are considered to be twice as important as Fiscal Management and
Track Record. Ability & Evaluation is slightly more important than the latter two areas.
Weighting Assessment area Weighting Assessment area
10 Community Impact 6 Ability & Evaluation
10 Community Need 5 Fiscal Management
10 Fits City of Brookings
Priorities
5 Track Record
Application Funding Process and Worksheet Narrative
2
Rev 12/19
Definitions of Assessment Areas in Scoring Worksheet:
Community Need
The program addresses a recognized health and human services need in our community
The need is consistent with BAUW mission and funding priorities for the current year
The problem/situation addressed by the agency is serious
The agency provides strong data to validate the need for this program
Impact
The program clearly demonstrates a meaningful linkage between community needs, program activities and
outcomes
The program provides a meaningful volume of services and/or people served
United Way funding will make a difference and bring about positive change in people’s lives
Ability & Evaluation
The Agency has a history of reliability
There is adequate staffing and resources to conduct this program
The program plan is sound
Clear goals and objectives are written
Measurable outcomes are evident
The agency/program demonstrates the ability to deliver and measure proposed outcomes
Financial Management
Financial information is presented clearly & accurately
The agency has a balanced budget
The agency has adequate reserves BAUW policy recommends 3-6 months
There is diversified funding/other funding is available to support program(s)
The funds that are requested from BAUW support client services
Overhead expenses are a reasonable % of total budget
Track Record
The agency appeared to have accomplish their goals and objectives from last year
The agency makes a difference with previous years’ UW funding
Application Funding Process and Worksheet Narrative
3
Rev 12/19
Application data entry (Executive Director, Date Dec 2021)
• Ratings for all applications are entered in the application funding worksheet, which computes an application
score. Applications are initially categorized as:
Score Category Significance
276 to 414 Green Automatically receives as close to full funding as possible. No committee
discussion.
200 to 275 Yellow Flagged for discussion by committee. May receive up to Green category funding
level.
0 to 199 Red Automatically receives no funding. No committee discussion.
Examples and rationale for the categorization scores:
Weighting 10 10 10 6 5 5 Agency Name Community Impact Community Need Fits BAUW Priorities Ability & Evaluation Fiscal Management Track Record Application Score Score Range Agency 1 9 9 9 9 9 9 414
Agency 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 276
Agency 3 6 3 9 6 6 6 276
Agency 4 6 6 6 1 3 1 206
Agency 5 6 6 6 1 1 1 196
Agency 6 1 9 9 9 9 1 294
Agency 1 receives Exceeds Expectations ratings, resulting in a 9X10+9X10+9X10+9X6+9X5+9X5 = 414 score.
Agency 2 Meets Expectations in each area, resulting in a score of 276
Agency 3 is Lacking in Expectations in Community Need, but Exceeds Expectations in Fits BAUW Priorities and
Meets Expectations in all other areas, resulting in a score of 276 equivalent to Agency 2
Agency 4 Meets Expectations in the three most important areas and rises above Failure to Meet Expectations in
one other area, resulting in a score greater than 206, above the 200 cutoff
Agency 5 Meets Expectations in the three most important areas but Fails to Meet Expectations in all other areas,
resulting in a score of 196, below the 200 cutoff
Agency 6 Fails to Meet Expectations in one of the three most important areas, and thus is flagged Yellow for
discussion in spite of having a strong score of 294