Laserfiche WebLink
<br />PRIVATE FUNDRAISING ACTIVITIES · CONTINUED <br /> <br />Another met.ho(j of securing private funding is through <br />corporate sponsorship. 1\'1any facilit.ies and programs lend <br />th('ms(~l\'('s to corporat.f' sponsorships t.hal ent.ail a business <br />agreement with thr sponsor such as naming l'igl1t.s. puhlicir,y. <br />exclusivity. or access to lists of program Jlrovidf~rs in exchange <br />for payment. In tht' challenging economic environment. some <br />cities have eased restrictions on sponsorships anll naming <br /> <br />righl.s as a mrans for funding projects and programs, <br /> <br />Heyond these elements, there are opportunities fOl' park <br />and recreat.ion funding from private founcJations. PI'ivate <br />foun<lat,ioIl grants have heen an impOl'lant elernt~nt in the <br />linancillg uf lIlunidpall'ecrt'C.lliulI celllel' d('velopme/ll <br />Hnd nt,her' park facilit.ies in thp. Bay Area and elsewhere <br />in CaliforniCl. An f'ffpcl.ivf. fincmr.ing program For I hI", <br />improvement.s identified in the fHcilities plan should include. <br />a component dil'tlcted toward this sr.cl.Or. The Peninsula <br />and Silicon Valley arf. replete \\.'ith private anc] community <br />foundat.ions. some with national stal,lIre. that conduct. <br />large-scalp. grantmal\ing, It should he note(1 that effectively <br />competing for pI'i\'8Ie founrlallon grants is a specialized, <br />formicJable and time-consuming undel'tal\ing that has the <br />plltt.'Illiallu I'eap significant rewcl!'(ls \\'hel't' the 'Tit" is right <br />wllh a glvro fOlln<lat,ioo. A slIccessful [ouIH1at.ion funcl raising <br />program will require (lXperUse' of City st.aff and expe\'ienc(~cl <br />011 tside counsel. <br /> <br />STATE AND FEDERAL GRANTS <br /> <br />Both the stalp and fpcl(>('al governmenls havc historically <br />pI'm'Wfrl suhstantlal grant l'eSOUI'ces 10 municipal <br />gm'ernments for park and recreation improvements, <br />While lhe availahility and requirements o[ slate and fellrral <br />grants change ow'r time. the City should he prepare(1 to <br />respond to cmd pursllf> such op!>orlunHips when t,hey arise, <br />Stale and fedel'al gl'ants typically require a SIgnificant local <br />matching share. <br /> <br />In 2000 California voters approved Proposilion 12 that. <br />included funlls lor local assistance grants for parks ami <br />rf'creal.ion. In 2002 Statt' votpl'S passed Proposition 40 thai <br />also included funds fOl' local pmK and recrea!.ion assistance, <br />Both of the~w pl'ograms are now complet.ed. howe\,('I'. there <br />will likely he additional Sl,ate grant.s availahle in thl' future, <br /> <br />7A <br />Page 38 <br /> <br />8('(lJJill# Stu(~\' I 32 <br /> <br />Un<lt'I' CUI'l'ent economic conditions aI, the I ime of this writing. <br />relt-'asl' of Funds for many Slate grants are on hold, however. <br />1.111' City should continuf to apply for gl'Cll1ts be prepared for <br />imm('(liatr action once funds ar(' ('('Ir.asr.f1, <br /> <br />f('(/('ral grant sources have heen lIsed successfully in some <br />communiUes t.o SuppOl'l park and recrr.ation lamJ acquisition <br />and impl'Ovements. Historically. these sources have incluclpd <br />the Land and Watrl' Comwrvation Fund (LWCP). Community <br />Development. Block Grants (CDBG). and cllmponl'llts o[ <br />various transport.ation funding acts (ISRTEA, 'l'E:A-21 <br />and SAFETEA), These programs still exist and shoul(j <br />llt' explored as part of the City's implementation or the <br />Facilities Scoping Study. <br /> <br />COST RECOVERY PROGRAM <br /> <br />As general fund revenues have lagged belliml costs in many <br />municipalities, interest has inel'eased in ~cUing user fees and <br />charges for park and recreation facilities and pl'ogl'ams at a <br />level 10 covel' at least the ongoing operations and maintenancl' <br />cost~ fOl' t.hese facilities and programs. 01' at leasl to close Uw <br />hinding gap [or active use activities, It is recommende(1 that <br />Parks. Recreation and Community Sel'vices Ill' included in all <br />fOl'mal City analyses of cost recovery fees in t.he Futllre. <br /> <br />GENERAL FUND REVENUES <br /> <br />G('neral rf~venllf'S am rf:'venues that the city !'f'ceives and <br />that may Ile used for any valid municipal purpose, Gerwral <br />revrnue is used to fund most on-going municIpal sel'Vices <br />including parks and recreation, public safety, puhlic works, <br />and general government services. The greatest sources of <br />general revenue are typically sales tax and propert.y tax with <br />othel' sOUl'ces including fees and chal'ges for services. In good <br />economic times. some municipalities have had the resources <br />10 fund cJlJilai pl'Ujecls f!'OlIl genel al I'f:'\'l'rtue, Mosll'ilies fillll <br />themselves in very different economic circumstances today. <br />Considering the CIII'rent economic environment. it is unlikely <br />the City of Redwood City would Ile in a position to Fund a large <br />capit.al project or projects from the city's Gl~nel'al fund, <br /> <br />020 J 0 The Spun,\; Managflllent Gmup <br />