Public Recreation

This post was adapted from something that I had previously written.

When I go for walks, I frequently pass by Curtis Junior and Senior High School. In recent years, there have been changes to Curtis. Among them is the addition of new ball fields and what appear to be batting cages. I can’t help but think of what a waste that is to taxpayers.

Here’s where my problem is. The public is spending money that goes into developments like these. The schools control these facilities. These facilities are built for specific purposes. It is unlikely that you will walk by with anyone but their baseball team would using these facilities. Since these teams usually meet outside of school hours, these facilities don't see a whole lot of use. This means that we are funding facilities that spend the bulk of their time providing absolutely no benefits.

When you think about it, this is one of many examples of public funds going into restricted recreational facilities. Gymnasiums may be used during school hours, but their usage will be severely limited during weekends and summers. We are funding things that we can’t use, and even children will receive limited value for our money.

If we really want public funds going into recreational facilities, I think that we need to shift our resources from the schools to our parks and recreation commissions. They already maintain simpler facilities, and they should be better suited to adapt to recreational support than the highly unrelated schooling process. They could also consolidate. Instead of having two schools nearby with redundant facilities that are rarely used, you could create facilities that both schools could use along with the public.

If we shifted our public recreational support to parks and recreation, we could base the creation and maintenance of facilities off of demand rather than size of the school attached. This could create more opportunities for those who are not of school age, reduce unnecessary redundancies, and help justify support for less popular activities.

Even the schools that currently control recreational opportunities would likely see benefits. Students’ recreational opportunities would be restricted by the size and interest of the community, not by the subset of the population that attends that particular school. This would provide a greater variety of opportunities for those imprisoned by the schools. It would also improve the opportunities for less skilled participants of sports to find something enjoyable.

The bottom line here is that I do not see any logical reason to attach public recreational opportunities to the schools. The schools are inefficient and are not designed for recreational support. If we want public funds to go into recreational developments, then public recreational funding should fund public recreation.