City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
Meeting Date: 05/07/13 Item Number: A-1
PRCS COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM: (1) Consideration of Establishing a Parks,
Recreation and Community Services Commission “Sponsorship/Fiscal Support” Ad
Hoc Subcommittee; and, (2) if Approved, Make Appointments to the Newly Formed
Subcommittee.
Contact Person/Dept.: Dan Hernandez,
PRCS Director
Phone Number: (310) 253-6655
Fiscal Impact: Yes [] No [X] General Fund: Yes [] No []
Public Hearing: [] Action Item: [X] Attachments: [X]
Public Notification: (Email) Meetings and Agendas – Parks, Recreation and Community
Services Commission (05/02/13).
Department Approval: Dan Hernandez
(04/30/13)
City Attorney Approval: N/A
Chief Financial Officer Approval: N/A City Manager Approval: N/A
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Parks, Recreation and Community Services (PRCS)
Commission (1) consider establishing a“Sponsorship/Fiscal Support”AdHoc
Subcommittee; and,(2) if approved, make appointments to the newly formed
Subcommittee.
BACKGROUND:
During the years 2006 through 2011, the Parks, Recreation and Community
Services (PRCS) Commission had a two-member Fundraising or Financial
Resources Development Subcommittee. The Subcommittee did not engage directly
in the fundraising; it was formed to assist the PRCS Department in developing
fundraising strategies. In a January 12, 2011 email to the City Council, the PRCS
Commission proposed the development of the “CC Giving Donation/Sponsorship
Program” which would ultimately provide the following types of donation
opportunities:
Phase I. Park Amenities (the “Park Hero Program”)
Phase II. Park and Recreation Facility Improvements
Phase III. Services and Programs
Phase IV. Corporate Sponsorship, including Naming Rights
September 6, 2012 Dissolution of the PRCS Commission Advisory Subcommittees
At the September 6, 2012 meeting, the six (6) standing PRCS Commission Advisory
Subcommittees were reviewed in terms of several factors, including the most
appropriate application of the Brown Act. The outcome of the Commission’s review City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
was that all six Advisory Subcommittees were dissolved; some because they had
become obsolete and others, which were considered to be standing Subcommittees,
were dissolved due to fiscal and staffing implications associated with the public
noticing and accommodation requirements of the Brown Act. Ad Hoc
Subcommittees with a limited purpose and duration, which do not require public
noticing and accommodation, were formed as deemed appropriate.
Developing a Broader Vision Regarding Sponsorship/Fiscal Support
During discussions on the development of the Park Hero Program brochure,
Commissioner Yanda and Chair Stuart, the members of the CC Giving
Donation/Sponsorship Program Ad Hoc Subcommittee,decided that the topic of
fundraising should be expanded to develop a broader vision related to assisting the
PRCS Department in financial ways to maintain facilities, programs and overall
quality of life issues in Culver City. At the February 5, 2013 PRCS Commission
meeting, reports were submitted by each of the Ad Hoc Subcommittee members.
These reports are provided as Attachments A and B, respectively. Subsequently, a
recommendation was made by the Commission to request the City Council establish
a standing Commission Subcommittee to discuss and develop a strategy moving
forward on fundraising, tying in Economic Development, partnerships and
programming. The item was scheduled to go before the City Council on April 8
th
, but
the staff report was pulled from the Meeting Agenda at the request of the
Subcommittee members.
DISCUSSION:
On April 17, 2013 the Subcommittee members met with the City Manager, Mayor
Weissman and PRCS Director Dan Hernandez to discuss concerns related to the
report as submitted. It was determined that in order to present a proposal to the City
Council on the establishment of a standing subcommittee, clearly defined goals and
objectives needed to be determined.
In order to proceed, it is recommended that the Commission establish a
Sponsorship/Fiscal Support Ad Hoc Subcommittee and, if approved,appoint two
Commissioners to formulate a detailed plan to bring forward to the City Council. Ad
Hoc Subcommittee discussions will include updates from the PRCS Director as
appropriate with respect to the identifiable needs that exist, or may be reasonably
foreseen in the future, and to focus on areas involving amenities, program
partnerships, capital improvements and deferred maintenance issues that are
relevant to the discussion. It is recommended that a viable plan would include:
1. Identifyingneeds within the PRCS Department that can be addressed through
sponsorships and other types of fiscal support.
City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
2. Defining roles as well as time commitment of Commissioners and the PRCS
Director in this process of developing the plan for City Council review.
3. Identifying challenges related to this project.
4. Prioritizing how to address those needs within the established roles of
Commissioners and possible partnership outreach to assist the Ad Hoc
Subcommittee in meeting its goals.
FISCAL ANALYSIS:
At this time, there is no fiscal impact associated with the discussion of this Agenda
Item.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. “PRCS Department Donation/Sponsorship Program Status Update with
Recommendations for the Future,” a report submitted by Commissioner
Yanda at the February 5, 2013 PRCS Commission meeting.
B. “PRCS Fundraising in 2013,” a report submitted by Chair Stuart at the
February 5, 2013 PRCS Commission meeting.
MOTIONS:
That the Parks, Recreation and Community Services Commission:
1. Establish a “Sponsorship/Fiscal Support” Ad Hoc Subcommittee;and
2. Appoint Commissioner _____________and
Commissioner________________ ____________________ to the newly
formed Subcommittee;
OR
3. Provide staff with alternate suggestions.
MEETING DATE: May 7, 2013
AGENDA ITEM: (1) Consideration of Establishing a Parks, Recreation and
Community Services Commission “Sponsorship/Fiscal
Support” Ad Hoc Subcommittee; and, (2) if Approved,
Make Appointments to the Newly Formed Subcommittee.
ATTACHMENTS
Pages
A. “PRCS Department Donation/Sponsorship Program Status
Update with Recommendations for the Future,” a report
submitted by Commissioner Yanda at the February 5, 2013
PRCS Commission meeting.
1 - 3
B. “PRCS Fundraising in 2013,” a report submitted by Chair
Stuart at the February 5, 2013 PRCS Commission meeting.
4 - 14
PRCS Department Donation/Sponsorship Program Status Update
with Recommendations for the Future
Report by Commissioner Yanda Page 1 of 3
January 21, 2012 Commissioner Yanda
For February’s PRCS Commission Meeting
Report on status of the PRCS Donation / Sponsorship Program; Current “Park Hero”
materials; Analysis of the future direction and function of ad hoc subcommittee.
The PRCS Commission has historically explored ways to secure additional resources
for the PRCS department for many years. In January 2011 the Commission’s original
program was divided into four categories:
1. Park Amenities (brochure)
2. Facility Improvements
3. Services and Programs
4. Corporate Sponsorships (including naming rights)
There was also a recommendation to Council to consider a floating a bond in the future.
1. Park Amenities Program to date
Additional work by the current Ad Hoc Sub-committee members has resulted in refining
step one of the original plan for securing outside funds for park amenities. The current
brochure(s) and recommended 1 page template(s) for the PRCS dept website are now
in the final draft phase after receiving input from Commissioners and the PRCS
Director.
Highlights of the brochure are as follows:
a. Brochure is designed in Word in order to make it simple for staff to make
changes. These changes may include approved price changes to reflect increases,
adding or deleting amenities or parks in need; payment options; links to any social
media sites run by the city to support the program; Co-branding the brochure to make it
easy for service clubs / non-profits and approved groups (chamber of commerce,
homeowners associations, sports leagues, etc.)
b. Brochure was redesigned to use less color making it less costly to print in-house
or for those downloading it from the website.
c. Simple brochure design lends itself to being edited for special events. Photos
can be swapped easily and space can be made without the need for graphic designer.
d. It is recommended that this brochure be the first of several marketing materials to
support an amenity donor program. Evaluating how effective the first brochure is at
creating interest will be up to staff and commissioner. Alterations or redesign may be
needed after reviewing feedback.
ATTACHMENT A
1PRCS Department Donation/Sponsorship Program Status Update
with Recommendations for the Future
Report by Commissioner Yanda Page 2 of 3
Highlights of the recommended webpage are as follows:
a. The recommended design is one used by Santa Monica, CA after examining the
variety of amenity donations websites across the country. This design is simple and
easily uploaded and maintained by the city IT dept.
b. Should include a downloadable version of the Park Hero brochure.
c. Have the ability to allow visitors to sign up if interested in the program. In
addition to name & contact information this e-mail sign up can be used it as a brief
questionnaire to establish area of interest, time frame for donation, type of donor
(bequest, celebration, corporate, etc.) and to track hits, identify leads and start a
database. This is dependent on what IT is able to do.
d. Second stage of city designed webpage would be to include a simple Park Hero
newsletter, and a Big Wish list.
e. Third stage would be to establish a virtual donor wall online and explore other
uses based on staff input.
Additional actions:
? Finalize brochure and website
? Determine whether the design and branding is effective – make changes as
necessary
? Design collateral materials to be used as templates by staff
? Long term goal should be to develop a set of branding guidelines (colors, fonts,
and formatting) to maintain a consistent quality and protect the PRCS brand.
? Develop a media plan to cover publicity, news, notable donations, social media
and newsletters.
? Develop a network of Park Hero ambassadors through those groups already
active with PRCS (seniors, sports related, teen center, past donors).
? Use other city events to get the word out about the program – table tops and
program placement along w/ Fiesta marketing should be a goal & part of
negotiations
? Test and track results – bring back to commission for progress report.
? Determine whether smaller donations (under $500 / 250 / 100) should have some
form of recognition and what form recognition in each category will take.
Steps 2, 3, 4 + Bond – determining what works and how well.
2. Facility Improvements
3. Services and Programs
4. Corporate Sponsorships (including naming rights)
5. Future Bond
2PRCS Department Donation/Sponsorship Program Status Update
with Recommendations for the Future
Report by Commissioner Yanda Page 3 of 3
The economy and the city’s budget constraints have put more pressure on the PRCS
dept than was foreseen when the original project was undertaken by the Commission.
Culver City has historically been small enough to weather the ups and downs of the
economy but the expectations of residents have increased over the past 15 years as
have the costs of running the department. Examining what other cities have done when
faced with these same challenges has been useful to understand how to continue to
effectively work towards the stated goal of the Commission; securing additional revenue
sources for the PRCS dept for the immediate future and developing a mid and long
range set of recommendations to send to council for consideration.
Fundraising versus Friend-raising: How does the public view city parks direct
fundraising efforts?
Research by the National Parks Foundation and NRPA has established that direct
fundraising by parks departments is less effective and tends to encounter resistance
whereas the same fundraising appeal by a “Friends of” or other credible NPO results in
more donations and support. Passive donation programs such as amenity donations
which include memorial plaques do work, however the same rule follows - park
boosters are effective in spreading the word and result in increased donations.
Effective fundraising efforts by similar sized parks departments rely on evaluating
proposed fundraising / marketing programs through the lens of establishing the true cost
of raising money; SWOT analysis to maximize opportunities while avoiding negative
pubic perception and/or unintended consequences of these efforts; identification of key
supporters; developing joint fundraising opportunities with other groups; sponsorships;
and most importantly setting realistic goals with revenue targets for each category of a
fundraising program and tracking the results of these efforts.
All of this requires time, effort and work on the part of the city and department, but the
effort can show good results if applied consistently. The ad hoc sub-committee should
continue as a valuable link to the commission, community and other partners.
There should be an agreed upon master schedule, project list and an online repository
for notes, research, projects and work in progress of this sub committee in order to
manage the complex nature of the ad hoc subcommittee’s work without administrative
support from staff. Both current subcommittee members have begun making use of a
system and it is available to the dept director.
It should be a priority of the ad hoc sub committee to meet with the director and put
together a master list of recommendations, tasks remaining on current work, projects
and timelines along with a progress report and any work that is ready to be sent to the
city council for an update at the next commission meeting.
3ATTACHMENT B
Report by Chair Stuart 4 Page 1 of 11 Report by Chair Stuart 5 Page 2 of 11 Report by Chair Stuart 6 Page 3 of 11 Report by Chair Stuart 7 Page 4 of 11 Report by Chair Stuart $ Page 5 of 11 Report by Chair Stuart g Page 6 of 11 Report by Chair Stuart 10 Page 7 of 11 Report by Chair Stuart 11
Page 8 of 11 Report by Chair Stuart 12
Page 9 of 11 Report by Chair Stuart 13
Page 10 of 11 Report by Chair Stuart 14
Page 11 of 11