 |
|
rec cost mustn’t
hurt programs
The current dispute between the county and the county school system over fees that the Columbus County Parks and Recreation Department must pay to use school athletic facilities is unfortunate.
The county schools recently billed the parks and recreation program $4,000 to use school facilities for the youth basketball program. The long-term, simple relationship of give-and-take is now on shaky ground.
Before, there was a gentleman’s agreement that parks and rec would maintain some fields and perform projects like building backstops at no cost to the schools. In return, parks and rec would have use of school facilities for its recreation programs.
Commissioner Ronald Gore, who is also the operations manager for the county schools, said the actual cost per hour to use a gym is about $39 per hour, which does not includes paying a custodian to be on site.
The prudent way to proceed in this dispute is for both the school system and parks and rec to do a cost analysis of the services each provides the other.
The simplicity of the unwritten agreement has worked well for many years, as both the schools and parks and rec have made good-faith efforts to help each other. The schools feel they are on the losing end of the agreement, however.
By partnering, there is a savings to taxpayers. Parks and rec, long the red-headed stepchild of the budget process, needs school facilities to hold programs. The school system maintains some fields while parks and rec takes care of others.
A cost analysis would in fact show who has a greater expense, but it would be unfortunate if the study detracted from the recreation and physical education programs. Both parties have the same mission – to give children an opportunity to get exercise or to learn to play together on a team.
Whether it’s in school or after school really doesn’t matter.
A cost analysis is probably the only way to resolve this dispute, but both the county commissioners and county school board need to understand what a shame it would be if this impasse takes away from recreation opportunities for children.
The extreme need for better recreation and after-school programs for our youth is an editorial for another day, but in the short term, results from a cost analysis study should not stand in the way of guaranteeing that current after-school programs are maintained at their current levels.