A look at the 2007 County Parks & Rec Facilities Needs Assessment Report

From Flat Rock resident Tom Brown, here is a breakdown of Henderson County's 2007 "Facilities Needs Assessment Report" that he sent to the Flat Rock village council. This needs assessment report has been used as the basis of the Henderson County Soccer Association's (HCSA) and the county's push for a soccer complex.Yellow highlights are those of Mr. Brown, and all other highlights, italics, and links are my emphasis:

Dear Councilman Wert and others;

I thought it appropriate to share something I have been working on for some time now concerning the "Soccer Complex" issue.

It has been revealed and used quite frequently by the HCSA and others that there are certain cornerstones to the requirement for the need of a "Soccer Complex" that need to come into question.

From the beginning, [Henderson County Soccer Association president Clement] Riddle has touted the "Needs Assessment Survey" and its results as a key foundation for the requirement that Henderson County and now Flat Rock accept the "Soccer Complex" as a requirement. He also has represented that the HCSA will have 1,200 youth players and 600 adult players if the Soccer Complex is built.

Interestingly enough, the "Needs Assessment Survey" and its results have been ... misrepresented and have certainly not been appropriately quantified or qualified to represent the facts as they have been presented by the HCSA.

The actual "Needs Assessment Survey" was a flop, it was not representative of the population of Henderson county and in no way resulted in the "Number One need being stated as a Soccer Complex."

The survey, as revealed in the minutes of the Henderson County Commissioners, states that the "Needs Survey," the basis for the HCSA argument on the need, was not in any way shape or form a representative sample of Henderson County taxpayers, ....

[The county] opened five high schools on a Tuesday night for 2 hours and only 153 votes were taken, out of 102,000 residents in Henderson County at the time, and the resulting poll question voted number one was far from a specific need for an exclusive 9-soccer field complex as represented. Furthermore, I have not been able to establish how the survey was advertised or represented to the public for input.

The premise that we need 9 soccer fields for 1,200 youth players and 600 adult players providing revenue to the project will never be realized by their own admissions of only needing 5 soccer fields at this time in the "needs assessment survey" that they are relying upon. Someone needs to request from the Parks & Recreation Department an accounting for the paid "soccer player" fees received over the last 5 years. These numbers as presented are a "Pipe Dream" as defined by commissioner Bill O'Conner. The HCSA has projected a membership participation of 1,200 youth players and 600 adult players and currently according to the HCSA website, only has 87 fall players listed and never has had adults. [See my clarification below to explain these numbers somewhat.]

To further bolster my claims about the exaggeration, the "whoops" email sent from [Henderson County Parks & Rec director] Tim Hopkin's email concerning the Commissioners' meeting went out to just over 800 players, by their own admission, with listed emails in the entire region of western NC, which includes many counties and many other Soccer Associations. I know not everyone has email that might be in our county program, but what is the true count in Henderson County?

The HCSA misrepresents the findings of the "Needs Assessment Survey." Look at this document presented to the County Commissioners on December 3, 2007, and the following excerpts:

On page 2 of 19:

The current youth soccer program requires an area of 5 full size fields; however during the twenty year period of this study, as many as 10 fields could be needed. A full size soccer field measures 120 x 80 yards. Ideally, as many fields as possible should be located together. This greatly enhances the opportunity to host tournaments and better facilitates scheduling of games for participants and staff. The use of artificial turf was proposed as one possible solution to address the heavy use of the soccer fields. Artificial turf fields can accommodate almost nonstop play, whereas, turf fields require extended periods of recovery without any use. Artificial turf has a greater initial cost but lower annual maintenance cost as compared with turf. A soccer complex was also identified as a facility that would have adequate parking, concessions, restrooms, maintenance (facilities and equipment) and amenities such as walking tracks/trails, playgrounds and green areas.

Notice, only five fields are needed...not 9, not 7!

On page 3:

A complex with five fields is currently needed in the County. Additional fields could be added into the complex to meet the growth of soccer over the next twenty years or a second complex built. The complex(s) need to be centrally located within the County and best close to the intersection of I-26 and US 64. It is not practical to plan for this type of facility to be duplicated throughout the County and a centralized location near large transportation corridors will provide the best access situation. Also, this location will best accommodate tournament participants. An approximation of the expenditures over the next twenty years is between $6,000,000 and $11,500,000.

Notice centrally located was stipulated, close to the intersection of I-26, and it is not practical to place it into a non-central location near a major traffic corridor. Only five fields are indicated, why nine at Flat Rock?

Funny how Clement did not project this claim in the report...? Also, who established the need for 5 fields? There are many other "Soccer Complexes" in other cities in the tri-state area with fewer fields that serve much more of a population than Henderson County.

Also, there were only 153 participants, in five public sessions held at the High Schools on Tuesday night....out of over 102,000 residents in Henderson county, wow, what a representative sample.....I submit, it was probably loaded with soccer people. How did they inform the residents of Henderson County that this survey was going to be taken and that it would effect their pocketbook in the near future?

Furthermore, here is the exact wording of the "Number One" need as expressed by this "representative sample" (found on page 8, noted at the North Henderson High School input session from August 28, 2007):

Soccer coach, soccer facilities are declining, need complex with multi-use fields (field turf fields), lighted, location should be centralized in County.

Interesting, NEED COMPLEX WITH MULTI-USE FIELDS..., I don't read this as "need exclusive 9 field soccer complex in residential neighborhood"....or even 7.

I wish you would take a more investigative view and look into the "Facts" as claimed before taking any action. This only took me two hours to uncover and I am sure there are many more untruths to be exposed. I have placed a call and sent email to the survey company and have not received any response as to the validity of the results as presented. This in itself makes me think that the survey is a ruse at best.

In summation, the Village should carefully consider the ramifications of backing up a flawed plan by the Henderson County Commissioners and the potential impact of a developed and poorly used and funded park in their district. The plan for this "Soccer Complex" will only bring heartache and trouble to our district.

I would note one clarification: The number of soccer players cited in the needs assessment report includes both those playing through the Henderson County Parks & Rec Department and the HCSA. Parks & Rec has more players since their teams are open to all, while HCSA has many fewer as they are competitive teams that require try-outs and cuts, and both groups were added together to come up with the overall numbers of 1,200 youth and 600 adult soccer players.