5. PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN – CONSULTATION RESULTS - GUIDING PRINCIPALS AND KEY RECOMMENDATIONS

PLAN DIRECTEUR DES PARCS ET DES LOISIRS – RÉSULTATS DES CONSULTATIONS – PRINCIPES DIRECTEURS ET RECOMMANDATIONS CLÉS

Committee RecommendationS As AMENDED

That Council:

1. a) Receive the Parks and Recreation Master Plan consultation results outlined in this report (including the key themes and priorities set out in Tables 1, 2 and 3);

b) Direct that the guiding principles (set out in Table 4) be used as the basis for planning, managing and financing parks and recreation services.

c) Direct that the City’s parks and recreation services be based on a financial model that clearly demonstrates the relationship of services supported by the tax base and other revenue sources, including:

i) That recreation fees be based on a cost recovery continuum with revenues and tax support based on ability to pay and recognizing fully tax supported services (e.g., some programs for priority segments, outdoor rinks, wading pools, parks and beaches)

ii) Development of a new fee policy that recognizes priority segments (i.e., residents with low income, children, youth, seniors and persons with disabilities)

iii) That sponsorship and advertising revenues generated by parks and recreation be retained for the provision of recreation services.

d) Direct that recreation services be reasonably accessible by neighbourhood and inclusive regardless of ability to pay, culture, physical ability or age, including

i) Enhancement of the subsidization program to ensure access to services regardless of ability to pay and off-setting facility allocation charges to continue to be subsidized by tax dollars for priority segments.

ii) Balancing neighbourhood-based community centers with district and citywide multi-use facilities.

iii) Enhancement of communication strategies for programs and services

iv) Enhancement of service delivery based on partnerships (e.g., with school boards)

v) Allocation of space based on a balanced approach considering changing demographics and historical patterns.

e) Direct that the City provide recreation facilities and program opportunities that reflect local community interests and capacity to delivery within a broader citywide framework, including:

i) A Service Delivery role that provides safe recreation infrastructure and opportunities for residents to be healthy and active

ii) Provision quality of services based on interests and needs of the community

iii) Increased services for youth, seniors, Francophone and those with special needs

iv) Using partnerships with all levels of government and the private sector to support advanced or elite activities.

v) Attract, train and recognize volunteers.

f) Direct that the City adopt an approach to providing quality parks and recreation services that contributes to a sustainable, healthy and active City for the next 15 years.

g) Direct that staff report back in the first quarter of 2010 with the final Parks and Recreation Master Plan that will provide a road map and timetable for the individual policies that will be coming back to coming back to Committee and Council consistent with the principles and recommendations set out above.

2. That the word “quality” be inserted to the recommendations where appropriate.

RecommandationS MODIFIÉES DU Comité

Que le Conseil :

1. a) recevoir les résultats des consultations relatives au Plan directeur des parcs et des loisirs présentés dans le rapport (y compris les thèmes principaux et les priorités des tableaux 1, 2 et 3);

b) déclare que les principes directeurs (tableau 4) doivent servir de fondement à la planification, à la gestion et au financement des services relatifs aux parcs et aux loisirs;

c) indique que les services relatifs aux parcs et aux loisirs fournis par la Ville doivent reposer sur un modèle financier montrant clairement la relation entre les services qui sont financés à même l’assiette fiscale et ceux qui le sont par d’autres sources de revenus, notamment :

i) l’établissement des tarifs pour les services de loisirs selon le principe du recouvrement des coûts, les recettes et le soutien fiscal étant fondés sur la capacité de payer et reconnaissant les services entièrement financés par les deniers publics (p. ex., certains programmes pour segments prioritaires de la population, patinoires extérieures, pataugeoires, parcs et plages);

ii) l’élaboration d’une politique sur les tarifs qui tienne compte de segments prioritaires de la population (p. ex., résidents à faible revenu, enfants, jeunes, personnes âgées ou handicapées);

iii) utilisation des recettes de commandite et de publicité obtenues par Parcs, Loisirs et Culture pour la prestation de services récréatifs;

d) exige que les loisirs soient raisonnablement accessibles aux résidents des divers quartiers et favorisent leur insertion, quels que soient leur capacité de payer, leur culture, leur condition physique et leur âge, notamment par les moyens suivants :

i) bonification du programme de subvention afin de rendre tous les services accessibles quelle que soit la capacité de payer et maintien de la pratique consistant à compenser les frais d’attribution des installations grâce aux impôts pour les segments prioritaires de la population;

ii) atteinte d’un équilibre entre les centres communautaires de quartier et les installations multidisciplinaires locales et municipales;

iii) mise au point de stratégies de communication au sujet des programmes et des services;

iv) amélioration de la prestation de services par l’entremise de partenariats (p. ex., avec des conseils scolaires);

v) attribution des locaux et des espaces en fonction d’une approche équilibrée tenant compte de l’évolution démographique et des tendances historiques;

e) veille à ce que la Ville fournisse des installations récréatives et des programmes conformes aux champs d’intérêt des résidents des divers quartiers et à sa capacité de les offrir dans un cadre municipal plus vaste, notamment qu’elle assure :

i) une prestation de services offrant aux résidents une infrastructure sûre et des possibilités de loisirs qui leur permettront de demeurer actifs et en santé;

ii) des services de qualité conformes aux champs d’intérêt et aux besoins de la collectivité;

iii) l’augmentation des services offerts aux jeunes, aux aînés, aux francophones et aux personnes ayant des besoins spéciaux;

iv) l’établissement de partenariats avec tous les paliers de gouvernement et le secteur privé aux fins d’activités de calibre avancé ou d’élite;

v) le recrutement, la formation et la reconnaissance de bénévoles;

f) faire adopter par la Ville une formule pour la prestation de services de qualité relatifs aux parcs et aux loisirs qui contribuera à faire d’Ottawa une ville durable, saine et active durant les 15 prochaines années;

g) enjoindre au personnel de déposer au premier trimestre de 2010 la version définitive du Plan directeur des parcs et des loisirs, lequel présentera le calendrier et fournira les balises des politiques individuelles qui seront soumises à l’examen du comité et du Conseil, dans le respect des principes et des recommandations énoncés ci‑dessus.

2 Que le mot « qualité » soit inséré dans les recommandations, là où il convient.

Documentation

1. Deputy City Manager's report, City Operations dated 19 November 2009 (ACS2009-COS-PRC-0013).

2. Extract of Draft Minutes, 3 December 2009, will be distributed prior to Council.

Report to/Rapport au :

Community and Protective Services Committee

Comité des services communautaires et de protection

and Council / et au Conseil

November 19, 2009 / le 19 novembre 2009

Submitted by/Soumis par:

Steve Kanellakos, Deputy City Manager/Directeur municipal adjoint,

City Operations/Opérations municipales

Contact Person/Personne ressource :

Aaron Burry, General Manager/directeur général

Parks and Recreation & Cultural Services Department /

Services des parcs, des loisirs et de la culture

(613) 580-2424 x 23666, Aaron.Burry@ottawa.ca

City Wide/à l'échelle de la Ville

Ref N°/ N° de ref.: ACS2009-COS-PRC-0013

SUBJECT:	parks and recreation master plan – consultation results - Guiding principals and key recommendations
OBJET :	Plan directeur des parcs et des loisirs – résultats des consultations – principes directeurs et recommandations clés

REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

1. That the Community and Protective Services Committee (CPSC) table this report at its meeting of 19 November 2009, for consideration at its meeting of 3 December 2009;

2. At its meeting of 3 December 2009, that the Community and Protective Services Committee recommend Council:

a) Receive the Parks and Recreation Master Plan consultation results outlined in this report (including the key themes and priorities set out in Tables 1, 2 and 3);

b) Direct that the guiding principles (set out in Table 4) be used as the basis for planning, managing and financing parks and recreation services.

c) Direct that the City’s parks and recreation services be based on a financial model that clearly demonstrates the relationship of services supported by the tax base and other revenue sources, including:

i) That recreation fees be based on a cost recovery continuum with revenues and tax support based on ability to pay and recognizing fully tax supported services (e.g., some programs for priority segments, outdoor rinks, wading pools, parks and beaches)

ii) Development of a new fee policy that recognizes priority segments (i.e., residents with low income, children, youth, seniors and persons with disabilities)

iii) That sponsorship and advertising revenues generated by parks and recreation be retained for the provision of recreation services.

d) Direct that recreation services be reasonably accessible by neighbourhood and inclusive regardless of ability to pay, culture, physical ability or age, including

i) Enhancement of the subsidization program to ensure access to services regardless of ability to pay and off-setting facility allocation charges to continue to be subsidized by tax dollars for priority segments.

ii) Balancing neighbourhood-based community centers with district and citywide multi-use facilities.

iii) Enhancement of communication strategies for programs and services

iv) Enhancement of service delivery based on partnerships (e.g., with school boards)

v) Allocation of space based on a balanced approach considering changing demographics and historical patterns.

e) Direct that the City provide recreation facilities and program opportunities that reflect local community interests and capacity to delivery within a broader citywide framework, including:

i) A Service Delivery role that provides safe recreation infrastructure and opportunities for residents to be healthy and active

ii) Provision of services based on interests and needs of the community

iii) Increased services for youth, seniors, Francophone and those with special needs

iv) Using partnerships with all levels of government and the private sector to support advanced or elite activities.

v) Attract, train and recognize volunteers.

f) Direct that the City adopt an approach to providing parks and recreation services that contributes to a sustainable, healthy and active City for the next 15 years.

g) Direct that staff report back in the first quarter of 2010 with the final Parks and Recreation Master Plan that will provide a road map and timetable for the individual policies that will be coming back to coming back to Committee and Council consistent with the principles and recommendations set out above

RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT

1. Que le Comité des services communautaires et de protection (CSCP) dépose le présent rapport à sa réunion du 19 novembre 2009 afin que celui‑ci soit examiné au cours de celle du 3 décembre suivant.

2. Qu’à sa réunion du 3 décembre, le Comité des services communautaires et de protection recommande au Conseil :

a) de recevoir les résultats des consultations relatives au Plan directeur des parcs et des loisirs présentés dans le rapport (y compris les thèmes principaux et les priorités des tableaux 1, 2 et 3);

b) de déclarer que les principes directeurs (tableau 4) doivent servir de fondement à la planification, à la gestion et au financement des services relatifs aux parcs et aux loisirs;

c) d’indiquer que les services relatifs aux parcs et aux loisirs fournis par la Ville doivent reposer sur un modèle financier montrant clairement la relation entre les services qui sont financés à même l’assiette fiscale et ceux qui le sont par d’autres sources de revenus, notamment :

i) l’établissement des tarifs pour les services de loisirs selon le principe du recouvrement des coûts, les recettes et le soutien fiscal étant fondés sur la capacité de payer et reconnaissant les services entièrement financés par les deniers publics (p. ex., certains programmes pour segments prioritaires de la population, patinoires extérieures, pataugeoires, parcs et plages);

ii) l’élaboration d’une politique sur les tarifs qui tienne compte de segments prioritaires de la population (p. ex., résidents à faible revenu, enfants, jeunes, personnes âgées ou handicapées);

iii) l’utilisation des recettes de commandite et de publicité obtenues par Parcs, Loisirs et Culture pour la prestation de services récréatifs;

d) d’exiger que les loisirs soient raisonnablement accessibles aux résidents des divers quartiers et favorisent leur insertion, quels que soient leur capacité de payer, leur culture, leur condition physique et leur âge, notamment par les moyens suivants :

i) bonification du programme de subvention afin de rendre tous les services accessibles quelle que soit la capacité de payer et maintien de la pratique consistant à compenser les frais d’attribution des installations grâce aux impôts pour les segments prioritaires de la population;

ii) atteinte d’un équilibre entre les centres communautaires de quartier et les installations multidisciplinaires locales et municipales;

iii) mise au point de stratégies de communication au sujet des programmes et des services;

iv) amélioration de la prestation de services par l’entremise de partenariats (p. ex., avec des conseils scolaires);

v) attribution des locaux et des espaces en fonction d’une approche équilibrée tenant compte de l’évolution démographique et des tendances historiques;

e) de veiller à ce que la Ville fournisse des installations récréatives et des programmes conformes aux champs d’intérêt des résidents des divers quartiers et à sa capacité de les offrir dans un cadre municipal plus vaste, notamment qu’elle assure :

i) une prestation de services offrant aux résidents une infrastructure sûre et des possibilités de loisirs qui leur permettront de demeurer actifs et en santé;

ii) des services conformes aux champs d’intérêt et aux besoins de la collectivité;

iii) l’augmentation des services offerts aux jeunes, aux aînés, aux francophones et aux personnes ayant des besoins spéciaux;

iv) l’établissement de partenariats avec tous les paliers de gouvernement et le secteur privé aux fins d’activités de calibre avancé ou d’élite;

v) le recrutement, la formation et la reconnaissance de bénévoles;

f) de faire adopter par la Ville une formule pour la prestation de services relatifs aux parcs et aux loisirs qui contribuera à faire d’Ottawa une ville durable, saine et active durant les 15 prochaines années;

g) d’enjoindre au personnel de déposer au premier trimestre de 2010 la version définitive du Plan directeur des parcs et des loisirs, lequel présentera le calendrier et fournira les balises des politiques individuelles qui seront soumises à l’examen du comité et du Conseil, dans le respect des principes et des recommandations énoncés ci‑dessus.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The City of Ottawa’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan has been designed to provide Council with a comprehensive strategy for decision-making based on a set of operating principles that are consistent with the City’s strategic directions and contribute to a sustainable, healthy and active City for the next 15 years. The principles were developed by way of a three-month public feedback process used to set the direction for the delivery of parks and recreation services.

These principles will be used to connect all decisions toward a mode of practice that respects and embraces the diversity of the City and is inclusive of its cultural, economic, geographic and demographic differences. This will require, in some cases, revisions to policies, financial commitments and partnership agreements and will assist in defining the role of the City in the delivery of parks and recreation services. Accordingly, this master plan is not a document that details facility infrastructure development, but rather a roadmap that sets the stage for refreshing and continuing the development of policies that will guide decisions. It is not a document that prescribes the activities that the City will operate but provides the policy framework and criteria to determine the best practice approach based on the interests and needs of the community.

Since amalgamation, which brought together 11 different municipalities under one governance system; the City’s parks and recreation services have been operating under a variety of principles and approaches. Over the last few years, progress has been made in growing and harmonizing recreation services on a citywide basis, but there is still a need to define a set of wide-ranging directional principles to guide Council’s decisions in providing an accessible, inclusive and quality recreation service to its residents.

It is predicted that the coming years will bring a shift in recreation services and delivery to meet the growth and demographic trends in population and activity, such as the high increase in the senior and immigrant populations combined with a continuing need to provide physical and social activity among children and youth. Under these evolving circumstances, there remain some questions to be answered if the City is to fully take advantage of the many social and economic benefits that recreation offers. The Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department has therefore developed the base for a best practice decision-making model. This will prepare the City for these challenges through forward-thinking and a responsive approach.

On April 23, 2008, Council approved the Framework and Planning Process For A Parks And Recreation Master Plan (ACS2008-CPS-PAR-0003) to respond to important questions such as ‘how the City should finance and deliver recreation services to meet the existing and future program and service needs of its residents.’ A Steering Committee was established with representatives from Council, the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee, the Health and Social Services Advisory Committee and the community at large. Since that time, extensive public consultation and analysis have been undertaken to produce the guiding principles and recommendations that will form the basis of the City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan and meet Council’s strategic objectives to ‘support recreational facilities and programming to match the population growth and trends’ and ‘ensure that cultural and recreation programs are offered across a range of levels of activity such that every resident, and in particular every child has a chance to participate’.

The intention of the City's Parks and Recreation Master Plan is to provide a set of principles and policies that will guide the delivery of parks and recreation services.

Incorporating a decision-making and policy-based model allows decisions to be made for each specific challenge as it arises rather than through long-term projections that often do not consider the interests and needs of the residents and or the economic realities of the times.

The strategic nature of developing the Master Plan consisted of a review of the entire parks and recreation system using four defined areas:

· Tax Support and Subsidization,

· Revenue Generation,

· Accessibility and Inclusion, and

· Service Delivery.

The following report defines the City’s commitment, operating principles and its relationship with programs, facilities, communities and partners in providing parks and recreation services. It contains a description of the public consultation process, the main themes and concerns expressed by the public and the resulting principles and key recommendations of the master plan for the future. The principles and recommendations developed over the last year have been designed to balance the needs and interests of the public and the realities of implementing the services within a fiscally responsible mandate.

BACKGROUND

Recommendation 2a) - Consultation Results

The process to involve public input in developing and focusing the master plan was inclusive, incorporating the piloting of the City’s new ‘Equity and Inclusion Lens’ thus ensuring that representatives of the social, economic, geographic and cultural mosaic of Ottawa had input. The process as approved by Council on April 23, 2008 consisted of two phases.

Phase One, included the:

· Confirmation and functioning of a community-based steering committee consisting of:

o Two members of Ottawa City Council from the Community and Protective Services Committee,

o Two representatives from the City’s Advisory Committees (Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee and the Health and Social Services Advisory Committee),

o Two representatives from the community at large

o Chaired by the General Manager of Recreation and

o Supported by the Parks and Recreation Master Plan Project Manager

· Development of an on-line public consultation process using white paper discussion forums on:

o Tax Support and Subsidization

o Revenue Generation

o Accessibility and Inclusion, and

o Service Delivery.

· The development of the guiding principles and key supporting recommendations required to provide Council and staff with a vehicle for decision-making relating to parks and recreation services.

· Validation of the guiding principles and recommendations with the public.

· A final action plan for approval.

The following graphic provides an overview of phase one and the expected outcomes.

Phase Two, includes:

· The development of an implementation plan consisting of the required policy reviews and updates, activities and tentative time lines required to put into operation the approved principles and recommendations.

1. Community Consultation

Guided by the City’s Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department and the Parks and Recreation Master Plan Steering Committee, the master plan process engaged the public’s participation both prior to and following the release of the white papers.

Consultations Leading up to the Development of the White Papers

The general format approved by Council for public consultation included an on-line feedback process to three individual white papers. The white papers dealt with the defined areas of Tax Support, Subsidization and Revenue Generation; Accessibility and Inclusion; and Service Delivery.

All three White Papers included a number of questions to assist the public to provide their ideas and comments about the future of parks and recreation services. This was not to be interpreted as a survey but as a method to engage the public in discussion.

Recognizing the risks of an online process of excluding some resident groups, steps were taken to ensure inclusiveness.

· Informing the public through a series of face-to-face meetings with community groups and organizations that represented the cultural, demographic and social economic diversity of the City.

· Requesting that stakeholders concerned with municipal governance and the health of the City [such as Council Advisory Committees, community associations, sports associations, health related organizations (Community Health and Resource Centers), recreation service delivery organizations (Boys and Girls Club, National Capital Region YM-YWCA, Ottawa Community Housing, Crime Prevention Ottawa) special needs groups et al,] coordinate their members, participants, board of directors and working groups to respond to the white papers either as a group response or as individuals.

· Recreation staff was engaged in contributing to the promotion of public input through a series of information sessions to ensure staff was knowledgeable of the process and available to assist their communities to be aware of the process and the importance of being engaged.

· Other departments within the Corporation such as Rural Affairs, Planning, Social Services and Public Health were engaged to assist in promoting awareness and response to the upcoming White Papers on the future of recreation.

· All members of Council and their staff were invited to an information session about the White Papers with a request to engage their residents.

· A master list of all groups and organizations using the City’s recreation services was updated and information sent to these individuals and groups to inform them of the up-coming process and request their response.

· Posters were distributed to all recreation centres, City service centres and libraries informing the public to ‘Have your say’ and respond to the White Papers.

Over the time frame from September 2008 to February 2009, recreation staff met over 50 organizations, associations and groups to generate interest and support for the Master planning process.

White Paper Consultations

The White Papers were launched following presentation to the Community and Protective Services Committee on May 7, 2009. The public was given the opportunity to provide their input via the City’s web site over a 14-week period (until August 25, 2009). A number of other communications activities were implemented, including:

· Media announcement in a local English and French daily newspaper seeking public input.

· Multimedia announcements to launch the White Papers and entice discussion.

· Flyers and posters distributed to all recreation facilities indicating how to respond to the White Papers

· Special newsletters were sent via Ottawa Crime Prevention, Rural Affairs and some community associations to ensure their stakeholders participated in responding to the White Papers.

· A footer indicating how to ‘Have your Say!’ on receipts sent to all individuals registered in summer recreation programs (summer camps, etc.)

As part of the public consultation strategy, recreation staff offered to assist any groups who requested further information, meeting space and or assistance to facilitate meetings and group responses. A staff master plan working group consisting of 14 recreation staff engaged in about 60 consultation sessions, hearing and assisting the public to respond to the White Papers.

The high response rate from the public is a strong and positive indicator of the importance parks and recreation plays in the lives of the citizens of Ottawa. Overall, it is estimated that the reach of the public response was about 18,700 individuals. This is directly attributed to the on-line or written submissions received from: 545 individuals, and 70 groups responses for a total reach of 18,700 residents

The responses are reflective of the diversity of Ottawa’s residents and are inclusive of gender, age, economics, geographic location (urban, suburban and rural) and the cultural mosaic of the City. This is confirmed through a ‘Respondent Profile’ section within the White Papers. Approximately half of the respondents answered the profile section, thus validating the participation from across the City.

The group respondents in many cases represented a collective response from a number of different organizations. Crime Prevention Ottawa and The City for All Women’s Initiative (CAWI) provided this type of response. Other group responses were based on a forum of different associations such as in some rural areas where five or six different associations developed a collective response for their Ward, the ‘Federation des aines et des retraités francophone de l'Ontario’, and others represented specific target populations such seniors groups, youth, special needs, arts and culture and others.

Two organizations worked closely with recreation staff, the City for All Women’s Initiate (CAWI) and Ottawa Community Housing Corporation. By engaging the Community Health and Resource Centers, CAWI hosted a series of 14 focus groups across the City targeting input from the multicultural, Francophone, Aboriginal and rural communities.

The Diversity and Employment Equity Division of the Human Resources Department of the City supported this particular initiative as part of a training and development program. The process resulted in 221 individuals contributing to the collective response submitted by CAWI. The Ottawa Community Housing Corporation hosted six focus groups involving staff, tenant associations, and residents with about 285 contributors and approved by their board of directors in a response that involved 300 individuals contributing Ottawa Community Housing’s collective response.

Between these two organizations, over 500 individuals discussed and formulated responses to ensure recreation services meet their needs in the future. Many of the contributing respondents represented groups that may not have contributed their comments through a strictly on-line process or a city wide public meeting.

A list of the 70 groups who submitted their response either on-line or by way of a position paper is set out in Document 2.

2. Developing the Parks and Recreation Principles and Recommendations for Action

The following graphic provides an illustration of the analysis of the public input and development of the principles and supporting recommendations to guide future decision-making relating to parks and recreation services.

Consultation Themes and Priorities

Although many specific issues and suggested solutions were presented during the consultation process, staff identified a number of common themes and priorities. These were acknowledged and interpreted through a process of both quantitative and qualitative analysis.

· The ‘closed questions’ responses were assessed quantitatively, providing a first-level review of the input.

· A qualitative review was then conducted to interpret and align the 6,500 accompanying free form comments to the different categories of questions. This was complex but inclusive of the fact that many of the responses cut across all three of the White Paper topic areas.

· All written position papers were reviewed based on the same approach as above and checked against the developing themes.

The themes are presented based on the three topic areas of:

· Tax support, subsidization and revenue generation;

· Accessibility and Inclusion; and

· Service Delivery.

Of note but not identified as a theme is that a high majority of the respondents freely commented on their satisfaction with the existing parks and recreation services.

The staff interpretation has been presented using a ranking scale as applied to the analysis.

Overwhelming majority – High majority – Clear majority – A Majority –

indicates approximately 90-100% of the respondents concurred indicates approximately 75-89% of the respondents concurred indicates approximately 60 – 74% of the respondents concurred indicates approximately 50 – 59% of the respondents concurred

Table 1
White Paper Topic Area	Themes and Priorities identified from public input	Comments
Tax Support, subsidization and revenue generation	· Ensure a balance between tax base support and revenue generation. · The priorities for tax dollar support include: - Facility development and maintenance; - Persons who cannot afford services, based on an ability to pay; - Services for and individuals with special needs or disabilities. - Services for youth. · Sponsorship and advertising is acceptable in recreation facilities as long as the revenues go back to recreation services and more specifically to the facility or community impacted by the sponsorship.	· Clear majority of the respondents provided comments supporting this theme. · High majority of respondents supported this and everyone was in full agreement that the revenues be put back to recreation for facility upgrades or program development.

Table 2
White Paper Topic Area	Themes and Priorities identified from public input	Comments
Accessibility and Inclusion	· Highly support and value neighbourhood based recreation facilities and park space for all levels of activities (deemed essential services). · Partnerships with schools and other organizations important to providing locally based services. · Partnership for programs for specific groups (seniors, special needs and multicultural groups), · Increase program activities for seniors and persons with disabilities. · Services for seniors – age and ability specific. · Priority - affordable activities for children, youth and persons with disabilities. · Priority - communicate program services and opportunities for subsidies. · Transportation is a main limiting factor to accessible services. · Allocation of space for programs based on established patterns, community needs and most benefit. · Consider alternative program services during non-prime time at reduced rates (seniors skating, and fitness).	· Overwhelming majority of respondents indicated the importance of the local community centre. · High majority of respondents recommended partnerships in particular with schools (questions were not asked specific to partnership). · Knowledge based on comments from seniors and groups representing persons with disabilities and supported by a clear majority of respondents. · High majority of responses for priority target segment of children, youth, persons with disabilities and low income. · High majority of responses inferred a need to improve communications on programs and subsidization procedures. · Clear majority of respondents indicated transportation a limiting factor and therefore need facilities close by or transportation alternatives. · High majority of respondents believe allocation of space should be based on community needs and established patterns.

Table 3
White Paper Topic Area	Themes and Priorities identified from public input	Comments
Service Delivery	· Neighbourhood community centres considered the cornerstone of liveable communities. · Mix of small centres and multi-use facilities is positive. · High end or advanced levels of program delivery not the responsibility of the City. The City to provide the opportunity but not necessarily bears the cost for all levels of programming. The City’s role is to support such ventures through partnerships of all levels of government and private sector · Partnerships for services i.e. special needs, seniors, high performance, and French language services and based on community needs. · City to work with communities to determine and express needs and work in partnership to deliver services. · Partnerships and outside groups should be required to follow specified City policies. · Programs should be offered in both official languages based on community need and that appropriate measures are in place to ensure both languages are being serviced. · Bilingual programs are acceptable if they are truly bilingual. · Training, development and recognition of volunteers are an important role for the City.	· Overwhelming majority of respondents. · Clear majority of respondents indicated support these activities but only if done in partnership and not at the cost to the tax dollar to implement. · High majority of respondents believe partnership is important delivery method. · Most of comments received indicated need to assess community interests and needs. · Overwhelming majority of respondents indicated partners be required to provide accessible and safe environments. · Majority of both English and French respondents agreed with this. · Overwhelming number of respondents supported this approach.

Recommendation 2b) – Guiding Principles

The main priorities and themes developed from the public input were applied by staff against:

· The strategic priorities of the City to provide a sustainable, healthy and active City and its supporting objectives to:

- Support recreational facilities and programming to match the population growth, and

- Ensure that cultural and recreation programs are offered across a range of levels of activity such that every resident, and in particular every child, have a chance to participate,

· Existing corporate policy guidelines such as and in particular the bilingual policy;

· Financial feasibility, and

· Staff’s cumulative experience and understanding of the challenges presented by the public.

The following guiding principles, which includes an overarching value as well as a number of principles specific to the areas of: Tax Support, Subsidization and Revenue Generation; Accessibility and Inclusion; and Service Delivery – are the core directional statements that will guide the development and implementation of the Master Plan’s key recommendations. They will continue to guide future decision-making within the City as they effect change in the policies relating to the delivery of parks and recreation services. The principles are of equal weight and have not been presented in any order of priority.

Table 4
Guiding Principles
Recreation is a key component and defining characteristic of Ottawa providing a vital service towards the social, physical and cultural wellbeing of all residents and shall be considered a core service of the City of Ottawa.
Defined Area	Principles
Tax Support, Subsidization and Revenue Generation	· Parks and recreation services will be provided based on a sustainable and fiscally responsible approach. · The cost of recreation services shall reflect a supportive relationship between tax support and revenue generation. · Tax support subsidies shall be based on program and priority segment needs.
Accessibility and Inclusion	· The City in partnership with the community, other levels of government and the private sector shall work towards eliminating barriers to participation including but not limited to safety, physical, economic, cultural, language, and transportation factors. · Parks and recreation programs will respect the official bilingual policy of the Corporation and be based on proactive assessments of community needs while respecting cultural differences. · The City’s parks and recreation services shall give priority to those services provided for priority segment groups. · The City will attempt to provide recreation services in a timely fashion to new housing developments. · The City recognizes that parks and pathway systems are one of the most valued of recreation services and shall attempt to provide accessible and balanced distribution of parks and recreation services throughout the municipality.
Service Delivery	· It is recognized that the residents of Ottawa highly value neighbourhood-based recreation facilities. The City shall balance existing and new facility demands through community and multi-government partnerships. · The City recognizes and reflects the diversity of its rural, suburban and urban communities and cultures in the provision of recreation services. · The City shall facilitate recreation service delivery based on community needs and capacity. · The City’s partnerships will be reflective of the City’s policies and priorities. · The City shall facilitate and recognize the leadership capacity of communities to contribute to providing safe recreation services.

Recommendations 2 c) d) & e) - Key Recommendations

Three key recommendations have been developed to ensure the City has the capacity to follow the guiding principles. These recommendations have been developed based on the principles and flowing from the themes and priorities that emerged through the public consultation process.

In order to implement the guiding principles and key priorities, a number of significant changes are required to the way the city does business currently. The following overarching and supporting recommendations will guide the future direction of parks and recreation services.

In some cases, where current policy exists or where previous background work has been completed, the supporting recommendations are fairly specific; in other areas, significantly more research and detailed work needs to be completed and thus the recommendations are high-level in nature.

Recommendation 2c) – Tax Support, Subsidization and Revenue Generation

The City’s parks and recreation services are based on a financial model that clearly demonstrates the relationship between services supported by the tax base and other revenue sources. In order for staff to have the ability to program effectively, it is important that there is some certainty in the level of support it receives from the tax base and in the level of revenue it is expected to receive from user fees. A more clearly defined model will also allow recreation users some level of cost certainty when planning their own personal and family recreation activities and leagues and organizations will be able to properly budget for their season.

i) Recreation services and fees are based on a cost recovery continuum. Revenues and tax support will be based on the ability to pay and some service lines such as some programs for priority segments, outdoor rinks, wading pools, parks, beaches will be recognized as being fully tax-supported services.

As noted in Table 1 of this report, a clear majority of respondents to the consultation supported a fiscal model that is fully transparent with respect to how parks and recreation services are funded.

ii) Develop a new Fee Policy recognizing priority segments. A family friendly approach to recreation which subsidized certain fees for children and youth will be complemented by a policy which is expanded to include other identified priority segments.

As noted in Table 1, a high majority of respondents to the consultation supported tax dollar support for priority segments, which includes residents with low income; children and youth; seniors and persons with special needs and staff proposes to report back with a new fee policy that recognizes those target markets.

iii) Sponsorship and Advertising revenues under Parks and Recreation to be returned for the provision of recreation services. In order to improve funding of recreation services, particularly those that require tax support and subsidization, it is recommended that revenues generated by parks and recreation sponsorship and advertising activities (including both citywide and community based funds) should be retained within the Department to fund recreation services. This is a concept that was supported by a high majority of respondents to the consultation.

Recommendation 2d) – Accessibility and Inclusion

Recreation services are reasonably accessible within local neighbourhoods and inclusive regardless of ability to pay, culture, physical ability or age.

i) Provision of a subsidization program ensuring ease of access to services regardless of ability to pay; facility allocation charges continue to be subsidized by tax dollars for priority segments and for both English and French services. Per Table 2, a high majority of responses supported priority target segment for residents with low income, children, youth, seniors and persons with disabilities and accordingly staff proposes to report back with an enhanced subsidization program.

ii) Balance neighbourhood based community centres with district and citywide multi-use facilities in such that there are easily accessible community meeting places for residents in their neighbourhood and larger recreation centres incorporating a larger geographic span for facilities such as aquatics and arenas. As noted in the Table 2 consultation results, an overwhelming majority of respondents indicated the importance of local neighbourhood based recreation while a clear majority of respondents indicated that transportation is a factor that limits access. Accordingly, staff recommends that future planning of facilities must strike an appropriate balance between neighbourhood based community centres and district and citywide multi-use facilities.

iii) Effective communication strategies for programs and services should be developed to ensure that residents are aware of programs offered; specifically, opportunities for free programs and fee assistance should be promoted to those who readily need the service.

The consultation results revealed that a high majority of respondents suggested a need to improve communications on programs and subsidization procedures and accordingly, it is proposed that staff develop an enhanced communication strategy for its programs and services.

iv) Service delivery should rely on partnerships to increase inclusion across the city (school boards) by facilitating the use of local assets such as schools, community centers, Ottawa Community Housing spaces and church halls etc. The city should examine implementing provisions that partners should follow specific City policies related to working with the public that impact inclusion, accessibility and safety. (For example child/staff ratios, subsidizations for targeted populations etc.). A high majority of respondents recommended enhancing partnerships, particularly with schools.

v) A high majority of respondents believe allocation of space should be based on community needs (e.g., changing demographics) and greatest benefit. The City should balance the community and organizations/groups needs. Those organizations and groups serving he largest community base should be balanced with those who have had long-term use. An approach to monitor and refresh the allotment of resources over a defined period of time should be implemented.

Recommendation 2e) – Service Delivery

The City provides recreation facilities and facilitates program opportunities that reflect the local community interests and capacity to deliver within a broader citywide framework.

i) An overwhelming majority of respondents indicated that partners should be required to follow City policies to provide accessible and safe environments. The city has a service delivery role to provide safe recreation infrastructure and facilitate opportunities for residents to be healthy and active.

ii) The City should provide services based on interests and needs of individual communities recognizing that one size does not fit all across the City. Service delivery should be based on the needs of the community with the City’s role of coordinating and linking of services by neighbourhood. Most comments received indicated a need to assess community interests and needs.

iii) Services for youth, seniors, Francophone and special needs are service areas in need of additional resources and/or a re-thinking of how programs and services are offered to these communities to most effectively serve the needs of the particular population groups. A high majority of respondents believe partnership is an important delivery method.

iv) The City should use partnerships to provide venues for advanced or elite activities. A clear majority of respondents indicated support for high end and advanced levels of program, but only if done in partnership, including senior levels of government and private partners, and not at the cost to the City taxpayer to implement.

v) An overwhelming number of respondents acknowledged the importance of training, developing and recognizing volunteers to enhance the overall recreation delivery system and to keep volunteers engaged and returning year over year. Support to volunteers through the development of policy, reducing administration, training and development and recognition programs will provide appropriate appreciation from the City in support of this important community resource.

Recommendation 2f) – The City’s Approach

The public input, principles and recommendations has lead to some defined roles for the City to provide recreation services that are consistent with the City’s mandate, fiscally responsible and are accessible and inclusive to all residents:

· The City shall act as a facilitator/enabler to empower community-based organizations to provide recreation services consistent with the vision of the City.

· The City shall reinvest and invest in neighbourhood-based recreation services (directly and in partnership),

· The City shall focus recreation services on priority segments such as seniors, children and youth, populations at risk (low income and special needs) and the incorporation of partnerships for higher end activities.

In practice the City shall:

· Provide and maintain safe recreation infrastructure,

· Provide the staff to facilitate recreation services.

· Provide services that are a priority to the health and safety of the residents and related services of planning, developing and managing parks and open spaces, recreation programs such as aquatics and,

· Assume responsibility for ensuring services are available for target markets.

Overall the City through its parks and recreation services will refocus its efforts toward a community development service with increased partnership opportunities based on community or private sector capacity and the needs of its target markets. This infers an integrated approach to service delivery whereas Parks, Recreation and Culture will work with other City branches and departments such as the Ottawa Police and Public Health to ensure we are able to contribute to building a sustainable, safe, healthy and active City.

Recommendation 2g) - Next Steps:

Following the approval of the guiding principles and key recommendations the next phase of developing the supporting implementation plan will be developed detailing required policy changes and other actions required to put into operation the recommendations. This roadmap will encompass the timelines relating to the changes in policies and strategies to advance and incorporate the principles and recommendations including:

· A detailed overview of the required actions specific to each recommendation with reference to the input provided by the public, benchmarks and estimated financial implications.

· An estimated timeline for the different policy adjustments and required reports.

For example:

Key Recommendations	Supporting Recommendation	Action Required	Time line	Impact
Recreation services are reasonably accessible by neighbourhood and inclusive regardless of ability to pay, culture, physical ability or age.	Balance neighbourhood-based community centers with district and citywide multi-use facilities.	- Prepare a new Community Infrastructure Strategy - Develop criteria for funding recreation facility development in context to developer fees.	Q4 2011	Financial implications

RURAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no specific rural implications associated with this report.

CONSULTATION

Parks, Recreation and Culture Department, under the guidance of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan Steering Committee, undertook a comprehensive consultation process as detailed in this report.

LEGAL/RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS:

There are no legal/risk management impediments to implementing the recommendations in this report.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no financial implications associated with this report. Financial details will be provided in the subsequent policy reports to Committee and Council.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Document 1 – Steering Committee Membership (Immediately follows the report)

Document 2 – List of Groups Responding to the White Papers (Immediately follows the report)

Document 3 – Parks and Recreation Master Plan Database of Submissions – (on file with the City Clerks Office)

DISPOSITION

The Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department will action any direction received as part of the consideration of this report

Document 1

Steering Committee Members

Diane Deans, City Councillor Ward 10 - Gloucester-Southgate, Chair, Community and Protective Services Committee

Christine Leadman, City Councillor Ward 15 – KitchissippiMember, Community and Protective Services Committee

Ian Duncanson, Chairperson, Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee

Brian Jonah, Member, Health and Social Services Advisory Committee

Mike Bulthuis, Member, Health and Social Services Advisory Committee

Keri Abella, Member, Health and Social Services Advisory Committee

Dina Bell-Laroche, Community representative

Larry Ketcheson, Executive Director, Parks and Recreation Ontario

Aaron Burry, General Manager, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services

Diane Huffman, Project Manager, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services

Tracey McGarry, Project Coordinator, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services

Document 2

List of Groups Responding to the White Papers

Group	Type
Arts, Heritage and Culture Advisory Committee	Advisory Committee
French Services Advisory Committee	Advisory Committee
Health and Social Services Advisory Committee	Advisory Committee
Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee	Advisory Committee
Seniors Advisory Committee	Advisory Committee
Ottawa Carleton Board of Education	Board of Education
Crime Prevention Ottawa	Coalition
Poverty Reduction Steering committee	Committee
Blackburn Community Association	Community Association
Bridlewood Community Association	Community Association
Cardinal Creek Community Association	Community Association
Champlain Park Community Association	Community Association
Crystal Beach/Lakeside Gardens Community Association	Community Association
Dovercourt Recreation Association	Community Association
Fallowfield Community Association	Community Association
General Burns Community Association	Community Association
Glebe Neighbourhood Activities Group	Community Association
Hintonburg Community Association	Community Association
Jack Purcell Recreation Association	Community Association
Munster Hamlet Community Association	Community Association
Ottawa South Community Association	Community Association
Overbrook Community Association	Community Association
Plant Pool Recreation Association	Community Association
Rockcliffe Park Residents Association	Community Association
West Wellington Community Association	Community Association
Active Ottawa Actif	Community Group
Cardinal Creek Community Center	Community Group
Ottawa East Community Activities Group	Community Group
Ottawa Public Health - Study on Physical Activity	Community group
Residents around the park	Community Group
Savoy Society of Ottawa	Community Group
Success by Six	Community Group
Ottawa Orléans Somali Community Organization	Cultural community group
CICAN	Francophone Association
Le Coordonnateur de la planification et es achats du Conseil des écoles publiques de l'est de l'Ontario	Francophone Association
Centre Pauline Charron	Francophone Community Group
Champlain Pool Group	Francophone Community Group
Rendez-vous des aines francophones d'Ottawa	Francophone Group – Seniors
Centre Espoir Sophie	Francophone Not for Profit Organization
Association Council - Ward 20	Groups of Community Associations
Association Council - Ward 5	Groups of Community Associations
Associations – Ward 15	Group of Community Associations
Group Meeting - Ward 10	Interest group
City for All Women's Initiative (CAWI)	Not for Profit Organization
Ottawa Boys and Girls Club	Not for Profit Organization
Ottawa Community Housing	Not for Profit Organization
The National Capital Region YM-YWCA	Not for Profit Organization
Acquired Brain Injury Day Program	Special Needs Group
Active Living Alliance for Canadians with a Disability	Special Needs Group
Coalition des parents de personnes ayant une handicap de développement ou déficience intellectuelle région Ottawa est-Orléans	Special Needs Group
Families Matter's Coop	Special Needs Group
Ottawa Stingers Wheelchair Rugby Club	Special Needs Group
The Families of Silent Angels	Special Needs Group
Spirit Plus	Special Needs Group for Youth
The Ottawa Rotary Home	Special Needs Not for Profit Organization
Blackburn Ladies Softball League	Sport
Elmridge Park Tennis club	Sport
Goulbourn Lawn Bowling Club	Sport
Hyper Sniper Hockey	Sport
Nepean Hotspurs Soccer Club	Sport
Nepean Kanata Barracudas Swim club	Sport
Nepean Old Timers Slo Pitch Association	Sport
Ottawa Disc Golf Club	Sport
Ottawa Flag Football League	Sport
Ottawa Knights Baseball Club	Sport
South Nepean Mixed 3 Pitch League	Sport
Telus Summer Hockey Crew	Sport
Youth Commission	Youth Committee
Youth Forum	Youth Committee