Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5B - Not-for-Profit/Community Organization Analysis - Use of Parks and Recreation FacilitiesCITY OF BOULDER PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD ITEM FOR INFORMATION MEETING DATE: JANUARY 29, 2007 AGENDA TITLE: Not-for Profit/Community Organization Analysis - Use of Parks and Recreation Facilities PRESENTER/S: Jan Geden, CPRP, Director, Parks and Recreation Jamie S. Sabbach, CPRP, Superintendent of Recreation Executive Summary: T'he purpose of this item is to inform the Pazks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) of the nature of the department's work with not-for-profit and other community organizations, and to shaze information regazding the approaches the department has followed relative to cost recovery and/or subsidy levels. Background Prior to 2001, the city of Boulder's financial position and condition was generally stable allowing for moderate budget growth. Since 2001, local and national economic recession resulted in significant sales tax declines and many city services were impacted through resource reductions. Since then, the Pazks and Recreation Department's Recreation Activity Fund (RAF) has experienced reductions totaling approximately $750,000. During this tnne, some departmental services were reduced with a few services eliminated. With ongoing reductions and costs escalating, it became increasingly more difficult to sustain programs and services with the pricing structure that was in place. The system for setting user fees lacked quantitative analysis and concern for the overall sustainability of the entire system was absent, lacking consideration for population served, type and scope of service, level of community interest, type of facility used, and other qualifiers. Beginning in 2003, the depar[ment undertook a comprehensive analysis to evaluate pricing methodologies and cost recovery and subsidy levels. Additionally the merits of each program, service and/or facility was addressed. This process was guided by a management tool, the MacMillan Matrix (Attachment A). This tool was designed by the Alliance for Nonprofit Management to assist not-for-profits and more recently, public sector organizations, in assessing their services. This tool allows organizations to focus their efforts towazds more efficient, cost effective, non-duplicative, high quality services. The analysis resulting from applying the MacMillan Matrix to departmental programs significantly contributed to departmental decisions determining which programs and AGENDA ITEM #SB PAGE 1 services were core to the department's mission, where duplication existed, how services might be made available to the community by other recreation service providers and the appropriate cost recovery goals for departmental programs. The goal was to generate a departmental specific sustainable service model. The model that emerged was the Core Services Model, similaz to those used by national and international pazks and recreation departments. This model is driven by a menu of defuritions that categorize programs, services and facilities based upon a varieTy o£ factors: population served, type and scope of service, level of community interest, type of facility used, and other qualifiers with the intention of stabilizing systems. On a pazallel track to the development of the Core Services, the city of Boulder's Business Plan was developed with the intention to classify all city programs and services into three consistent citywide categories (essential, desirable, discretionary), to identify current levels of service and to prioritize current and new funding. A goal of the business plan was to create a tool to assist in making objective funding recommendations. The Core Services Model and the city's Business Plan aligned, resulting in the departmenYs Core Services Business Model (CSBM - Attachment B). Since 2003 the department has changed its approach to pricing and wst recovery goals relative to population served, type of service, level of individual and community benefits, and direct and indirect costs. The CSBM is intended to direct availabie subsidies towazds programs and services classified as Basic and Merit, and therefore wanant higher General Fund subsidies. By definition, these General Fund subsidies indicate overall tax payer support £or these programs. They include programs and services that serve under- represented populations such as children and families living in low-income housing (Youth Services Initiative) and programs for people with cognitive and physical disabilities (EXPAND). Anatysis As a part of the 2006 Master Plan adoption process, the CSBM was presented to the community, PRAB and City Council. This methodology was met with feedback from some user groups who were concemed about increases to their user fees and chazges. The City Council and PRAB asked that staff analyze how the fees aze assessed to not-for- profit organizations. This request fit with the desire of some community organizations to be re-positioned within the CSBM and to receive greater subsidy. Questions also arose regarding how not-for-profit organizations are categorized relative to some specific departmental programs, such as Expressions Dance and Flyers Gymnastics. 501(c)3 status An organization may achieve not-for-profit 501(c)3 status by meeting the following purposes identified by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS): • chazitable • religious • education • scientific AGENDA ITEM #5B PAGE 2 • literacy • testing for public safety • fostering national or international amateur sports competition • preventing cruelty to children and animals According to the IRS, a11501(c)3 organizations must operate with the intent of managing funds to be re-invested into the organization for the purpose of sustaining the organization. Department's current practice relative to not for proftt/community organizations The departmenYs current practice relative to not-for-profit and community organizations is guided by Master Plan Policies 3.1 (Pricing), 3.2 (Use of Facilities and Pazklands by Nonprofit and Volunteer Organizations), and 3.6 (Use of Pazks and Recreation Facilities for Private Profit/Gain), (Attachment - C). These policies aze based on the departmenY s position that the 501(c)3 status of an organization is just one of many factors used to determine subsidy, not the sole determining factor. Further impacting this challenge are the following items: • The department works with more than 100 not-for-profit/community organizations. • The Recreation Division's Sports unit alone works wittt 56 different not-for- profiUcommunity organizations, affecting more than 7600 people. • IRS data indicates that approximately 29,000 new organizations a yeaz are declazed to be non-profit, taac-exempt organizations. . Since 1913, limited legislative changes have been made to the definition of what denotes a tax-exempt organization. . The federal government is currently reviewing the criteria under which organizations may obtain 501(c)3 status. What makes a department program During the master plan discussions, compazisons were made between how not-for-profits and department programs were categorized. In order to understand how some department programs such as Expressions Dance and Flyers Gymnastics are categorized within the CSBM, it is important to understand how the departrnent approaches recreation service delivery. The professional recreation industry uses various service delivery methods and approaches to best serve the needs of entire communities. By utilizing different types of delivery methods, there is a greater chance of extending services to a broader community. Each approach appeals to various types of people and provides greater benefit based upon the service provided, the expectations of the users, and resources available. The following four delivery methods are typically used within the parks and recreation industry and are used by the city of Boulder's Parks and Recreation Department: AGENDA ITEM #SB PAGE 3 General Supervision is the most common in both the public and not-for-profit sectors and provides only for general supervision as people use various spaces within a system. o This practice is commonly used by the Boulder Pazks and Recreation Deparhnent. An example would be the general oversight of a weight room in one of the three recreation centers. • Structured Leadership refers to the direct face-to-face leadership of an activity. o This practice is the most.prevalent used by the Boulder Pazks and Recreation Department. Ali classes, lessons and camps aze based upon Structured Leadership. The department hires staff and manages or directs the programs and assumes all financiai responsibility for the program. • Facilitation services aze provided to individuals and small groups to simulate and assist them in becoming independent and in control of their organization or activity. The goal is for these users to become self-sustaining and fully capable of managing their own recreation. o The Boulder Pazks and Recreation Department is often asked to oversee, manage and operate programs for the community. As it is not realistic for the deparhnent to provide every type of recreation or leisure service to the community (e.g., chess clubs, book clubs, swim clubs), the deparhnent may reasonably assist organizations in beginning or sustaining their program, i£ possible. This allows the community access to various types of services, not all managed by the department. • Indirect Leadership often augments recreation opportunities by providing equipment and other services for rent (a "rental" is considered any use of any pazks and recreation facility by an external user, whether it be an individual or group.) o The Boulder Pazks and Recreation Department provides significant Indirect Leadership to all facets of the community including approximately 100 not-for-profit/community organizations. These include but aze not limited to field rentals to groups and organizations such as North and South Boulder Little Leagues, Boulder Junior Soccer, University of Colorado Intramurals; Boulder Rugby and the YMCA; pool rentals to both Fairview and Bouider High Schools; facility rentals to Boulder Community Hospital, and MESA (Movement to End Sexual Assault) Exaznples of structured leadership programs with program elements in categories outside of Specialized and Enterprise-Like aze the department's dance and gymnastics programs. T'hese programs provide three levels of participation: • Novice • Intermediate • Competitive (Expressions and Flyers programs) These programs serve more than 1000 youth and adult participants each. Many people participate in these programs with the intent of experiencing a progression from the AGENDA ITEM #SB PAGE 4 novice to competitive ranks, while others may only participate in the novice or intermediate levels with no intention of participating competitively. Members of the gymnastics and dance staff teach at each level of the novice, interxnediate and competitive confinuum contributing to an efficient use of department resources. Both Flyers and Expressions operate at a cost recovery rate of more than 100% contributing to the overall subsidy of the novice and intermediate programs. Expressions and Flyers aze in the Specialized category based upon definition, however their cost recovery rate is expected to be 100% of direct and indirect costs. By comparison, not-for-profits in the model aze only expected to recover 100% of their direct and indirect costs and do not have the expectation of contributing to the sustainability of other programs. Financial Imp[ications In 2007, the Recreation Activity Fund (RAF) is expected to generate $7.7 million dollazs of a$9.5 million budget, primarily from user fees and charges. This equates to an 81 percent cost recovery rate, or a 19 percent subsidy for the entire fund. Programs in the Basic and Merit tiers of the CSBM aze funded by user fees and a General Fund subsidy. It is important to note that in addition to General Fund subsidy, many of the departmenYs Basic, Merit and Enhanced programs aze financially supported by revenues obtained from Specialized or Enterprise-like department programs in excess of their cost recovery goals and for-profit organizations. Due to this delicate balance, any adjustment in subsidy to programs in the Specialized or Enterprise-like tiers in the CSBM will result in less subsidy to programs in the model and more specifically those programs in the lower tiers. A significant loss in subsidy to Basic, Merit or Enhanced programs could result in the one or more of following circumstances: • A reduction in a program or service; • A discontinuation of a program or service; • A higher fee requirement for the program or service; and/or • A reduction of departmenY s costs to implement program. Attachment D provides a list of fifteen of the 100 + community organizations that currently do business with the departrnent. It shows that the cost to the Recreation Activity Fund would be $76,800 in the event a 20 percent subsidy was provided to those groups. It should also be noted that if groups decide to leave based on cost recovery expectations, there may be an immediate financial impact to the department, although most groups currently work within the cost recovery expectations in the model. Next Steps The department will continue its practice of partnering and collaborating with not-for- profit and community organizations. The department will continue to use Policy 3.2 to determine which not-for-profit and/or community organizations will receive department subsidy. With the vast number of not-for-profibcommunity organizations that meet the departmenYs mission, this process is daunting. AGENDA ITEM #SB PAGE 5 In order to be fair and equitable to all not-for-profit/community pazks and recreation mission-related organizations, the department is considering establishing a not-for-profit/ community organization subsidy work group similaz to the Partnership Work Group to develop criteria for implementing Policies 3.2 and others. The group would provide feedback to the department with the goal of creating more cleazly defined criteria in support of department program and facility use subsidy policies. Recommendation and Conclusion: The department is not recommending changing the placement of groups in categories in the CSBM or their cost recovery expectations. The department is recommending the consideration of a working group to assist in the department in creating more cleazly defined criteria to support the department's program and facility use subsidy policies. It is important to note that any changes to current subsidy levels within the model would necessitate either additional funding or parlnerships and collaborations that strongly support the departmenYs mission and assist the department in its efforts to subsidize underserved populations. Question for the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board: 1. Does the PRAB have questions regazding the categories in the Core Services Business Modei and how they aze defined? 2. Does the PRAB have any questions regazding the comparison of the departmenY s programs to not-for-profit and community organizations programs (rentals)? 3. Does the PRAB support the establishment of a work group to assist the department in developing more cleazly defined criteria to support the department's program and facility usage subsidy policies? Attachments: A: MacMillan Matrix B: The Core Services Business Model/Definitions C: Department program and facility use subsidy policies D. Sample rental groups and fees AGENDA ITEM #SB PAGE 6 MacMillan Matrix Attachment A High Program Attractiveness Low Program Attractiveness Alternative Coverage Alternative Coverage Alternative Coverage Alternative Coverage Strong Compet- itive Position Weak Compet- itive Position ni~n 1. Aggressive Competition Good Fit Competitive High Attractiveness High Coverage 3. Aggressive Divestment Good Fit Not Competitive High Attractiveness High Coverage 2. Aggressive Growth Good Fit High Attractiveness Low Coverage ni~n 5.Reinforce Best Competitor or Find Partner Good Fit Competitive Low Attractiveness High Coverage 7. Find Partner or Divest Good Fit Not Competitive Low Attractiveness High Coverage Ll! W 6."Soul of the Agency" Good Fit Low Attractiveness Low Coverage Competitive 4. Invest, Find Partner or Divest Good Fit Not Competitive High Attractiveness High Coverage 9. Aggressive Divestment Poor Fit High Attractiveness 8. Find Partner or Divest Good Fit Low Attractiveness Low Coverage Not Competitive 10. Orderly Divestment Poor Fit Low Attractiveness Good Fit Good Fit MacMillan Matrix Definitions Alignment with Mission Statement Services or programs that aze not in alignment with the organizational mission, unable to draw on existing organizational skills or lmowledge, unable to share resources, and/or unable to coordinate activities across programs should be divested. Competitive Position Competitive position addresses the degree to which the organization has a stronger capability and potential to fund the program and serve the client base than the competitive agencies. Program Attractiveness Program attractiveness is the complexity associated with managing a program. Programs that have low client resistance, a growing client base, easy exit barriers, and stable financial resources are considered simple or "easy to administer." The level of program attractiveness also includes an economic perspective or a review of current and future resource investments. Alternative Coverage Alternative coverage is the number of other organizations attempting to deliver or succeeding in delivering a similar program in the same region to similar constituents. ~ ~» ~ ~ ~ ~ a Y Attachment B CORE SERVICES BUSINESS MODEL BOULDER'S PARKS, FACILITIES AND RECREATION PROGRAMS Boulder Reservoir (except park land at reservoir); Flatirons Golf Course; Private Lessons (all kinds); Personal Training; Community Gardens, Harbeck House; Special or Dedicated Use Groups; Rentals Flyers Gymnastics; Dance Expressions; Pottery Lab; Special Adult Sports; Andrews Arboretum or facil Aduft Recreation Instruction; PleasantView Fields; recovei Fitness and Welfness Classes costs. Park Shelters; Satellite Ballfields Cofumbia Cemetery Business Plan Categories DISCREfIONARY ~ DESIRABLE ESSENTIAI Recover \ENTERPRISE-LIKE 100°/ of cosu ia b of See page 30 for definitions of these caYegories. 2~ Fhese pie charts illustrate the relative srze of budgets needed [o achieve each funding Ievel. Core Services Business Model Definitions The Core Services Business Model categories: o Basic Services recover 0-15 percent of costs. Basic services are the foundation of parks and recreation, provide widespread enjoyznent, and are central to the deparrment's mission. They generally indude provid- ing and maintaining parks and providing programs and services to under-served community members. They may meec legal requirements or enhance public health and safery. Examples: public open swim and turf areas in parks. o Merit Services recover 15-35 percent of costs. Merit services benefit a large proportion of the communiry, and both the individual and communiry benefit. They typically are not offered by other service providers due to rhe expeeted level of subsidy. Examples: park shel- ters, annual flower program, and EXPAND. o Enhanced Services recover 35-70 percent of costs. Enhanced services benefit a wide range of user groups but are targeted to interest groups, age groups, or abili- ty levels and are most beneficia] to individual users. They can take place at parks or facilities with higher operaring coscs. Examples: recreation centers, general youth recrearion instruccion, and dog parks. o Specialized Services recover 70-100 percent of costs. Specialized services benefit and are targeted to specific interest groups or ability levels and generally have fewer participants. They benefit the individual and, to a lesser degree, the community. Examples: Pottery Lab, Pleasant View Fields, and adult sports. o Enterprise-like Services recover 100 percent of costs. Enterprise-like services compete in the free mar- ket and are targeted to specific users based on an expressed demand and willingness to pay. racilities are typically expensive to build and maintain, may be of high 9uality; and are capable of attracting special events and promoting taurism. Enterprise-like services Attachment B ~~,. ~..,,a ~, ~.. ..,o ~~t,.~~.,~' ....,~. :..t:.;t~., :.^.;t,:0~~.^.:~.^.'.~. ,~...,,^.:t,..,~: Flatirons Golf Course, Boulder Reservoir, and indiv'rd- ual and group lessons. Funding Plans Masrer plan recommendadons, aligned ~trith the city's busi- ness plan, are linked to one of three funding strategies. Each funding scenario assumes that budget allocations will be increased annually to offset inflation pressures and retain current purchasing power. Fiscally Constrained Plan uses the depattment's e~cisring budget, but reallocates it to align with the highest prioriries for programs and services. Irr~plicationf for Pa»~c and Recreataon. To some degree, the department currently funds all categories (essential, desir- able, and discretionary) of programs and services within the fiscally constrained plan. The plan balances capital development, maintenance, and operarions of existing parks, recreation faciliues, and programs with che need to provide services for under-served populations. The depart- ment's funding structure provides multiple funds for oper- ating and capital functions. The fiscally constrained ptan will be maintained only if revenue growch and budget allo- cations are sufficient to offset future increases in operating expenses. The depar~rnent will conanue to evaluate busi- ness practices, make internal unprnvements, and leverage resources. If revenue growth from sales tax, properry tax, user fees, or General Fund support is insufficient, the department may need to reduce programs and services to absorb increases in operating costs due to growth and inflanon. Action Plan allows for the department to restore or expand faciiiues, programs, and services when funding becomes available. Implicatzonr for Parks and Becreatzorr. The action plan includes Summer pottery camp. Department Program and Facility Use Subsidy Policies Attachmenc C Mas[er Plan Polioes, con[ d by xecommendations from the Unieed Staces Consumer Producc Safety Commission, National Playground Safety Standards, manufacturers' instrucrions, and other safety souxces. Safety inspecrions of lands and faciliries will be made accoxding to the Department's pzoceduxes and in conjuncrion with che ciry 's Risk Managex and Facilities Assec Management scaff. 2.9 Atcesribility artd Istlurion - The Depaxcment is committed to providing all residents full access to its programs, services, and facilides. Structural modifica- tions to eglsring faciliues to comply with tl~e provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) will be made on a priority basis as funds are available for zenovarion and refuibishment Accessibiliry will be emphasized when desigcring, developing, and renovating facilities. The Depattment will consider the intecesTs and needs of residents eicperiencing economic or social barrieis in i[s effozts to pzovide equal access to leisure opportuniries. Every reasonable effoxt will be made to accommodate cesidents who experience such barriexs. (BVCP Policy 1.05 Communiry Engagement) 3. Program Policies 3.1 Priring - The city of Bouldei, in its citywide Financial and Management Policies, has established flegible Usex Fee Guidelines, which allow individual depart- ments ro determine how to establish user fees within general cost-recovery guidelines. The cost-recovery guidelines are consistent wirh es[ablished municipal best pracrices. Based on these guidelines, the Paxks and Recrearion Department determines costaecovery levels and categorizes programs on the basis of the popula- tion seroed and the narure of service pxovided. Nontesidents of the ciry of Boulder pay higher fees for seivices. Reduced rates for certain services are offeied to ciry xesidencs who meet low-income and other eligibility criteria. 3.2 U.re of Facilitier And PanE Landr By Not for-Pso~t os Goverrtmest Orgauigatioxt for Speria! Eventr - Paiks and recreadon faciliries and paxk lands may be used by not-foi-profit and government organizarions at a xeduced rate if theiu event is in collaborauon with the Deparanent, assists the Department in its efforts ro subsidize undexseroed popularions, and is consistent with the Depaztment's mission. A ptoposal oudining the event, its puxpose, target audience, ex- pected number of participants, fees, and staffmg will be submitted to the Diiector of the Parks and Recrearion Departmenc a minunum of ten weeks before the event. 3.3 Fxnd Raitiftg - The Depaxtment allows nonpxofit agencies to sponsox fundraising events in appzoved locadons. Agencies must comply wich all ciry event policies. 3.4 T~olxateerr - The Departmenc encourages che reamwozk of paid staff and volunteers so that usecs of paxks and faciliries are offered the besc possible sero- ice. The Depaztment shall develop and administer pzograms to encourage and coordinate communiry parriciparion in iecrearion programs and in [he care and maintenance of parklands and reczeauon facilides, induding an AdopaA-Pazk program and coordinarion with communiry gioups such as the Boulder Ciry Im- provement Associarion II. 3.5 Sptcial Eventt - The Department woiks with groups and individuals to hold special events subject to the following guidelines: • The fxequency of events does not pre-empt regular public use of the area. • The event is held in an appiopriace area for the anticipated size of the evenc and expected attendance and does not affecc a neighboxhood on a condnuing basis. • Environmental, safety, and public health concerns are addxessed. • Requests by ciry of Bouldei iesidents are given preference. - - M ~ Cg a -r s a' ~ x Department Program and Facility Use Subsidy Policies Attachment C Master Plan Policies, cont d • Other ciry depar[mencs are kepc infoxmed oE or involved in evencs. • Even[ holders must comply with all ciry special event policies. • All events will be reviewed for environmental impacts. Contracts may be required for special events not sponsored by the ciry. Contracc fees should ac least cover all direct cos[s to the city. The ciry may co-sponsoc an event if it has reason to paracipate financially. 3.6 Ute of Par.Et and Reneatinn Facilitier fos Private Psoftt/Gain - Faciliries piovided by ciry govexnments are for the public good and are not intended fox pnvate profit. Acriviries for private gain will not be allowed when they interfere with the conduct of ciry pzograms or general use by the public. Such acdvities may be allowed thzough a permit process with an appropriate fee. These acrivides will not be allowed if the city is already pzoviding or sponsoring a simIlar program (e.g., private lessons will not be conducted in city swimming pools). The pexmit/zental fee for commercial (private gain) purposes will be at least two rimes the rate fox a private rental, which is higher rhan a nonprofit rencal. 4. Faciliry and Resource Policies 4J Adeqxate Fatilitiet asd Sesvirot - Parks and iecreation facilities and services foz esisring and new urban cesidenual development shall be designed, devel- oped, renovated, refurbished, and maintained consistent with the adopred pazk services guidelines, park management plans, rhe recommendations and priorities of the Parks and Recrearion Depamnent Mastei Plan, and the financial priorides set in the Department's opezating budget and Capital Improvement Program. To support the provision of services that meet the demands of communiry growth, the Deparanent will work to ensure [hat Developmenc Excise Taxes are sec ac levels commensurate wich the cos[s of acquiring and developing park land and reczeational faciliaes. Before approving the development oE new parks and recre- auonal facilides, Eunds for operadons and maintenance must be identified. (BVCP Policies 3.01 Provision of Urban Sezvices in the BouldeL Valley, 3.02 Definidon of Adequate Urban Facilides and Services, 3.05 Grownc ~o Pay Fair Shaze of New Faciliry Costs and 3.12 Parks and Recreadon) 4.1 Focilitiar Looatiort.r - Parks and recreadon programs and facilities should be distributed chroughout the communiry to the greacest extent possible so that all segments of the populadon have reasonable access ro services. Facilides that do not require the full iange of urban services may be located in Axeas II and III subject to County review (BVCP Policies 2.24 Support Services foi Subcommuniries and 2.27 Variety of Acrivity Centezs) 4.3 Excroasb~xraxtr - The Department shall resist by all appzopriate means, including legal acrion, any attempt by any public agency, group, or individual to de- stroy or encroach upon any park, historical site, namral azea, ot recreauonal facility under the conuol of the Department. The Department considers its responsi- biliries to the residents of Boulder as a public trust, requiring commitment to the preseroation and protecrion of natural, cul[uxal, hordculruxal, and recreanona] resources located on park lands. The Department shall enlist the aid of enlighrened and alert residents to support this policy. Whenever possible, parkland bound- aries should be pxominendy macked, fenced, oz designed around natural featuLes ro prevent encroachmen[s. Enczoachments into park land from adjacent property owners will be examined and managed on a park-by-paik basis. 4.4 Pxblic/Priuatt Partasrrbipt - Proposals foz [he placement oF zecreational faciliries or ocher amenities on public park land shall be subjecc to review based on the critena outlined in che 2006 Parks and Recreation Master Plan. 4.5 Neigbborbood Aerponrive~tr.r - The Deparunent shall weigh neighboihood concexns and communiry needs in the development of neighborhood parks and ochex neighborhood facilides. Acrivides and amenities generally will be limited to chose appropriate for a residennal area. Neighbochood faciliries typically will be designed ro encourage walking and biking and will not provide specialized Faciliries that would draw from a larget area. (BVCP Policy 2.42 Enhanced Design for the Built Environment) Lq, k Recr - Z 0 ~<.~ . e Attachment D Sample Rental Groups and Fees Rental Groups and Fees (as of 12/06) Saorts User Grouas 2006 Fees Boulder County Force Soccer Club $ 36,700 Boulder Competitive Giris Softball $ 27,300 Boulder Junior Soccer/NOVA $ 25,500 South Boulder Little League $ 11,100 Boulder Rugby Club $ 10,700 Grass Roots Ultimate $ 9,200 YMCA $ 8,800 Boulder Valley Girls Softball $ 4,700 North Boulder Little League $ 4,200 Boulder Valley School District $ 2,900 University of Colorado Club Sports $ 2,100 Aauatic User Grouas 2006 Fees BVSD (Boulder and Fairview High Schools) $ 35,600 Boulder Swimming $ 70,000 Boulder Aquatic Masters (BAM) $118,000 Boulder Aquateens 17 200 Total $384,000 (20% subsidy) $ 76,800