My thoughts on the Department of Parks and Recreation

Parks & Recreation

7.  What do you think are the greatest unmet needs with regard to Parks and Recreation in Durham?  Is satisfying them a matter of more money or different priorities/management?  Do you think it would be helpful if the Durham Public Schools collaborated more with the Department of Parks and Recreation?   

Answer:  For me, the issues with parks and recreation are both a product of lack of funding/cuts as well as management concerns.  Firstly, I salute our invaluable staff who’ve made the best of a funding cut that reduced P&Rs overall budget form 12.8mil to 10mil over the past four years.  It’s not making something from nothing, but its making more from less.  The needs for more funding are obvious and more transparency regarding city spending and re- allotment of funds in this regard is also necessary.  How increased funding will be applied is also a major concern.  How does one ensure that new funds go toward programming as opposed to management salary increases?

 Regarding management priorities, the Parks and Recreation policy of anti-felon hiring often prevents community centered programming from having the necessary traction with at risk youth in Durham by excising those who can most relate to them from the possible employment pool.  Hence, many tutors, mentors, or programmers who are intent on giving back to Durham’s at risk youth are disallowed to do so by this specific policy and furthermore, this doesn’t seem to be a concern of management.  If the main purpose of certain programming is to serve at risk youth, perhaps it would be best to employ those who share their experiences.   In this way, perhaps City of Medicine Youth can be ‘vaccinated’ against social sicknesses via hands on testimony from ex incarcerees and reformed felons.  In my opinion ‘banning the box’ is facile if criminal background checks are the real standard for city/county employment.

Lastly, Concerning ‘collaboration between Durham Public Schools and Durham Parks and Recreation’, if one looks at the Holton model, there is already a language of collaboration between Duke, DPS and DPRs management.  This does not necessarily equate to having an ethos or practice of collaboration.  These upper level convos do not necessarily trickle down to material programming tactics and strategies.   A true collaboration necessitates intentional liaison between community engaged staff, i.e. teachers, T.A.s, and DPR programmers and tutors, from all involved organizations as opposed to only management meetings.  Multiple logos on a flier are not enough.