feasibilty study

Indiana Ice Center Feasibility Study

A Supplement to the IUP Study

White Township Indiana County Pennsylvania

January 2006

Executive Summary In 2005 the White Township Supervisors began to consider the possibility of acquiring the Indiana Ice Center to operate as a community recreation facility. The Supervisors contracted with a group of students from Indiana University of Pennsylvania under the direction of the IUP’s Management Services Group to determine the feasibility of such a venture. While the IUP Study provided an excellent overview and analysis of many of the issues concerning the feasibility of the Ice Center, DCNR felt that there was some additional analysis and supplemental information needed to satisfy their standards. In September 2005 the Township entered into a contract with Pashek Associates Ltd. to provide the additional analysis. It was decided that the additional analysis would be completed in the form of a supplement to the original Study. This report is that supplement.

Market and Demand Analysis The market and demand analysis identified the potential market area as a fifteen-mile radius surrounding the Ice Center, which includes most of Indiana County. The County population is 89,605. There were no other ice skating facilities located in the service area. The Indiana County YMCA was the only major community recreation center found. The total population of the area is used to help determine if there are sufficient persons to support a facility. Persons age 5-34 are the primary users of community recreation centers and ice rinks. Income and poverty levels provide an indicator concerning the residents’ ability to pay for the use of facilities. All of these indicators are compared to the figures for the entire state, which provides a benchmark for comparison. This analysis shows that the median household income in White Township is about 85% of that of the Commonwealth, Indiana Borough and Indiana County fall at 53% and 75% respectively, and that White Township’s per capita income exceeds that of the Commonwealth. The percent of the population (by age) that typically uses these types of recreational facilities is significantly higher in Indiana Borough than in the Commonwealth. This is due to the number of University students that live in the Borough. It is helpful to understand how other ice rinks in western Pennsylvania compare to the Indiana Ice Center. Fifteen ice facilities were identified in the rural counties surrounding the Indiana Ice Center. Eight of the ice rinks are owned and operated by municipalities or municipal authorities, while seven are privately owned. Finally, in looking at trends in the ice skating industry, the report finds that according to a 2004 survey conducted by the National Sporting Goods Association, participation in ice hockey increased by 28.9% from 1999 to 2004; participation by youth ages 7-17 increased by 26.6% between 1999 and 2004. Participation increased by 33% of those

Indiana Ice and Recreation Center Feasibility Study Page 1 of 29

ages 12-17 but decreased by 24.7% for those ages 7-11. It also shows that between 1994 and 2000 ice/figure skating participation declined from 7.8 million to 6.7 million. Figures were not available through 2004.

Public Participation Most of the public input for the Feasibility Study was conducted as part of the original IUP Study. However, one significant form of public input was conducted during this Study. Community leaders who are actively involved in various segments of the Indiana area were brought together to think broadly about the Center and to identify potential recreational activities, programs, and major events that might take place in the Center to assure financial viability. This group identified over seventy potential programs and activities that could not only serve the community’s recreational needs but also produce additional revenue for the Center.

Recreation Programming One of the major changes to be made at the Center will be to convert one of the ice rinks into a community recreation center. It will be vital to the overall success of the facility that the recreation center produces some revenue to offset building expenses. It is recommended that the recreation center be developed to allow as much flexibility in use as possible. A field house type facility will allow for a continual change of venue from one sport court to another. The greater the potential for adaptability, the greater the likelihood of meeting the recreational needs of the community and producing the revenue needed to operate the facility. Two potential programming options should be considered. One would be to operate the recreation program primarily through facility rentals. The second would be to operate as a true community recreation facility by offering a well balanced recreation program supplemented by facility rentals. It seems that the second option would be better received by the community and would provide a significant likelihood of producing the greatest amount of additional revenue. However, under either option, it is not likely that sufficient revenues will be produced to cover the entire cost of operating the recreation center. Instead, it can be predicted that additional revenues will be provided to help offset the overall costs. Three possible staffing structures were identified to manage the recreation programming.

• Use of existing or supplemental staff from the ice rink to manage rental of the recreation center.

• Hire supplemental staff to manage recreation center rentals and provide recreation programming.

• Contract with the Indiana Area Recreation Commission to manage recreation center rentals and a full community recreation program.

Financial Analysis It will be absolutely essential to operate the entire facility under sound business principles. A business approach to management needs to encompass all aspects of operations including admission fees, operational expenses, staffing, programming,


marketing, and much more. Close attention should be paid to the Pro-shop and food concessions to assure that they operate with revenues exceeding expenses. A slightly revised projection of income and expenses is provided in the charts at the end of this report.

Conclusion There are no strong indicators pushing conclusions of this venture toward either success or failure. Rather there are many factors that are very much down the middle. While the population of the County is smaller than might normally be expected for success of this type of operation, the extremely large population under age 35 suggests a much greater likelihood of success. The less than successful operation of this facility in the private sector in recent years might lead to the conclusion that the facility cannot be successful. But the strong commitment by the Township and the support of area residents suggests that the demand may be high enough for success. The comparison to similar facilities in rural western Pennsylvania counties shows that about half have been successful in operating in the private sector. Those that are operated by municipalities are financially successful in some years and not in others. Based on this analysis, the conclusion that can be drawn is that in some years the revenues produced at the Indiana Ice and Recreation Center will exceed expenses, and in other years expenses will exceed revenue. It is certainly feasible for White Township to own and operate the Indiana Ice and Recreation Center under these circumstances.


Introduction In early 2005 three students from Indiana University of Pennsylvania (IUP) conducted a Feasibility Study of the Indiana Ice Center for White Township. The students worked under the direction of IUP’s Management Services Group Co-Director Dr. Tom Falcone. The purpose of the Study was to assess the feasibility of White Township acquiring the Ice Center and operating it as a municipal facility. To accomplish their purpose the students:

• Extensively reviewed and discussed historical documents containing important information on the facility’s cost structure, operations, personnel, and financial statements.

• Toured and visited the facility on several occasions to gather information and examine specific aspects of the operations and infrastructure.

• Conducted qualitative interviews with staff, officials, users, non-users, local business owners, and athletic management.

• Visited comparable facilities, interviewed their management, and evaluated their operations.

• Reviewed and analyzed a current operating model for ice rinks including staff, utilization, programming, physical building layout, and marketing efforts.

• Reviewed, analyzed, and made projections from past historical financial documents.

• Developed multiple scenarios for operating the facility. • Exhaustively brainstormed diverse aspects of operations, partnerships, market

opportunities and other business concerns that would bear on operating the facility at break even or at a profit.1

The final report provides an excellent overview and analysis of many of the issues concerning the feasibility of the Ice Center. White Township used the Feasibility Study as supporting documentation to submit with a grant application in which they requested grant funding from the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR) for acquisition of the Center and the 6.5 acres on which it sets. DCNR felt that there was some additional analysis and supplemental information needed to satisfy their standards for a Feasibility Study. DCNR agreed to fund a grant to White Township to hire a qualified recreation business consultant to review the IUP Study and provide the additional analysis and data they required. Pashek Associates Ltd. was hired to conduct this work for White Township. Pashek Associates work would include:

• Utilizing the strongest components of the IUP Study. • Conducting a market and demand analysis.

1 IUP: Feasibility Study for White Township Purchasing and Operating the Indiana Ice Center. May 24, 2005


• Adding data and analysis to strengthen the Community Center portion of the Feasibility Study.

• Strengthening the building and facility analysis of the IUP report, particularly as it relates to the Community Center.

• Analyzing potential partnerships in acquisition, management, operations and maintenance of the facility.

• Strengthening the financial and program data and analysis of the IUP Report. • Adding necessary detail to the IUP Report.

It was agreed upon by DCNR, White Township and Pashek Associates, that Pashek Associates would not develop a completely new Feasibility Study, but would provide a report that would supplement the IUP Study.


Market and Demand Analysis In considering an endeavor such as this it is important to understand the demographic make-up of the area, the interests people may have in such facilities, and what other similar facilities may be in the area. The market and demand analysis considers factors in the local area and in the region, which may affect the use of the Indiana Ice Center. It considers that although the Center has been primarily used as an ice rink in the past, it is expected to also serve as a community recreation center. Therefore, the analysis takes into account factors that may affect either the ice rink or the community center.

Service Area Although the primary service area for this facility will be the immediate community, a facility of this type is expected to draw participation from within a ten to fifteen-mile radius. A ten-mile radius covers the greater White Township and Indiana Borough area. The fifteen-mile radius extends throughout all of Indiana County except a few municipalities in the northern part of the County. It also reaches into parts of eastern ACounty.

rmstrong

Other Comparable Facilities Within the service area there are no other ice skating rinks. Of the indoor recreational facilities in the area, only the Indiana County YMCA provides recreation center type facilities, but its use is limited to YMCA members. While anyone can join the YMCA, its facilities are generally not available to the public. IUP provides a number of similar types of facilities, but their use is generally limited to IUP students. There are also community centers in several smaller municipalities including Blairsville, Cherryhill Township, Montgomery Township, and Marion Center. These Centers provide a variety of community spaces, including limited recreational space, for their residents.

Demographics of the Service Area The following chart shows a variety of demographic information pertinent to analysis of the area for these types of recreation facilities. The total population of the area is used to help determine if there are sufficient persons to support a facility. Persons age 5-34 are


the primary users of community recreation centers and ice rinks. The percentages in the chart indicate how much of the population falls into this age category. Income and poverty levels provide an indicator concerning the residents’ ability to pay for the use of facilities. All of these indicators are compared to the figures for the entire state, which provides a benchmark for comparison. Population Median

Household Income

Per Capita Income

Percent of Residents

below Poverty Level

% of population ages 5-34

White Township 14,034 $34,469 $21,432 8.1% 35% Indiana Borough

14,895 $21,279 $12,317 11.2% 73%

Indiana County 89,605 $30,233 $15,312 9.8% 43.6% Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

12,281,054 $40,106 $20,880 7.8% 39.4%

From this data we make the following observations and conclusions.

• The median household income in White Township is about 85% of that of the Commonwealth. Indiana Borough and Indiana County fall at 53% and 75% respectively.

• White Township per capita income exceeds that of the Commonwealth. • There are a larger percentage of residents in poverty in the County, Borough, and

Township than in the Commonwealth. • The percent of the population (by age) that typically uses these types of

recreational facilities is significantly higher in Indiana Borough than in the Commonwealth. This is due to the number of University students that live in the Borough.

The General Success of Ice Rinks in Western Pennsylvania Many times the question comes up, “How many people are needed to support an ice rink?” There is no easy answer to that. In some areas of the country such as Michigan, Minnesota, and the New England States, ice rinks are supported in communities of less than 50,000 people. In the arid southwest it may take 200,000 people to support a rink. In western Pennsylvania the number is not based on a standard figure but on a combination of many factors. This report along with the original IUP Feasibility Study tries to evaluate these factors and estimate whether or not an ice rink is feasible in White Township, Indiana County, Pennsylvania. It is helpful to understand how other ice rinks in western Pennsylvania compare to the Indiana Ice Center. For the purposes of this Study, western PA is identified as the 26 county’s bounded on the east by McKean, Cameron, Clearfield, Blair and Bedford Counties and on the west by the Pennsylvania/Ohio border. Allegheny and Erie Counties


were not considered as part of the evaluation due to their more urban setting than any of the other 25 counties. In addition to the Indiana Ice Center, the Consultant identified fifteen ice facilities in the study area. Eight of the ice rinks are owned and operated by municipalities or municipal authorities. Seven are privately owned. The Indiana Ice Center is currently privately owned and being considered for municipal ownership. The following chart identifies each ice facility by County and type of ownership. The accompanying map shows the location of each.

Municipal Ice Rinks Private Ice Rinks Meadville Area Recreation Complex, Crawford County

Cranberry Blade Runners, Butler County

Hess Ice Arena, Lawrence County Valley Sports Complex, Westmoreland County

Brady’s Run, Beaver County Center Ice, Westmoreland County Belmont Complex, Armstrong County Southpointe Iceoplex, Washington County North Central Cambria Recreation Center, Cambria County

Divito Park, Fayette County

Johnstown War Memorial, Cambria County

Planet Ice, Cambria County

Nevin Ice Arena, Westmoreland County Galactic Ice, Blair County Washington Park Ice Rink, Washington County

Of the eight municipal ice rinks, all indicated that they were subsidized by local tax dollars to one degree or another. Although none of the private rinks were willing to share any financial information, it is a reasonable assumption that they are operating as profitable entities or they would not be able to stay in business. The Consultant visited and/or interviewed managers of five of the rinks most similar to the Indiana Ice Center. The results of these interviews help in understanding the operations of municipal rinks.

Meadville Area Recreation Complex This complex is located just outside the City of Meadville and includes an indoor, single sheet ice complex, an indoor/outdoor swimming pool, and a large municipal park. It is operated by the Meadville Area Recreation Authority, which is comprised of the City of Meadville, and West Mead and Vernon Townships. The Meadville Area School District is also involved. The Authority receives about $200,000 annually from the municipalities to subsidize their operations. A portion of that contribution is used toward the ice rink. The ice rink includes locker rooms and a snack bar that is shared with the swimming pool. All programs, hockey, figure skating, learn to skate, hockey instruction, camps, and others, held at the ice rink, are operated by outside organizations that rent the facility. Ice time rents for an average of $155 per hour.


Belmont Complex The Belmont Complex is owned and operated by Armstrong County. It includes the indoor, single sheet ice rink, a small banquet room, and an outdoor swimming pool. Exact figures were not available concerning revenues and expenses, but the Manager indicated that rink expenses have continually exceeded revenues in recent years. He was not able to say if that has always been the case. Ice time rents for $160 to $210 per hour. Armstrong County has the smallest population (72,392) of any county in western PA that has an ice rink.

Hess Arena Hess Arena is located in Neshannock Township, just outside the City of New Castle. This is a fairly new facility, built in 1991, that houses a single sheet of ice. It is owned and operated by the Township and located in Neshannock Township Park. It is primarily a rental facility where the local hockey leagues and figure skating club rent ice time for their programs. The Township does not typically operate programs at the rink. Ice time rents for $158 to $195 per hour. The rink is subsidized by the Township most years.

Brady’s Run Brady’s Run Ice Rink is part of the Beaver County Park system. It is located at the main entrance to Brady’s Run Park, Beaver County’s largest County owned park. The facility consists of the ice rink on one side of the building and an indoor tennis center on the other side. Between the two are observation and meeting rooms overlooking the facilities. The County Park offices are also located in the center section of the building. The ice rink has undergone some major rehabilitation in the past few years. In most of the recent years of operation, the County has subsidized rink operations. In at least one of the last ten years, revenues exceeded expenses by about 15%. It is expected that revenues should come close to covering the expenses of operating the facility. Revenues for the ice rink were $268,000 in 2004. The rink is primarily a rental facility. The County does not usually offer its own programs. Ice time is rented at an average rate of $150 per hour.

Nevin Ice Arena Nevin Ice Arena is owned by the City of Greensburg and operated through its Parks and Recreation Department. The facility is located at Lynch Field, one of Greensburg’s main parks. The park also includes an outdoor swimming pool and ballfields. As part of its annual budget, the City estimates both revenue and expenses. During some years revenues exceed expenses, while in other years expenses exceed revenues. The City estimated revenues for 2004 at $360,525. The Parks and Recreation Department rents ice time to local organizations as well as providing its own programming. Programs include Learn to Skate and Tot Skate. Ice time is rented at a rate of $165 to $185 per hour.


An additional analysis of the Nevin and Belmont Ice Rinks is provided in the IUP Feasibility Study. This additional analysis provides greater detail concerning these two facilities which can be used to compare specific operational aspects of each with the Indiana Ice Center. Several of the managers spoke of the cyclical nature of the skating industry. Usage and revenues will be up for a couple of years and then begin to decline for a couple of years. This trend tends to correspond with the winter Olympics, showing greater usage in the Olympic year. There is also a tendency toward greater usage when the Pittsburgh Penguins NHL team is doing well. It is evident that municipal rinks have good years and bad years. In good years the rinks may break even or at least come pretty close. In poorer years the rinks tend to loose money. Just as we looked at the demographics of the White Township/Indiana County region, it is important to understand many of the same factors in municipalities where ice rinks currently exist in western PA. The following chart depicts a variety of demographic information that allows for some comparison of the areas in which each of the twenty five ice rinks are located.

Community Demographics - Western Pennsylvania Ice Rinks County Local area County Local

Population Median

Household Income

Per Capita Income

% of Population age 5-34

Population Median

Household Income

Per Capita Income

Pennsylvania

12,281,054 $40,106 $20,880 39.4%

12,281,054 $40,106 $20,880

Indiana Indiana Borough

89,605 $30,233 $15,312 43.6%

14,895 $21,279 $12,317

White Twp.

14,034 $34,469 $21,432

Westmoreland Greensburg

369,993 $37,106 $19,674 34.9%

15,889 $30,324 $18,312

Delmont Second

Rink

2,497 $39,700 $20,090

New Kensington Third Rink

14,701 $30,505 $16,152

Armstrong Kittanning

72,392 $31,557 $15,709 36.4%

4,787 $20,921 $13,787

Crawford Meadville

90,366 $33,560 $16,870 39.9%

13,685 $25,407 $17,290

Cambria Ebensburg

152,598 $30,179 $16,058 36.3%

3,091 $32,628 $19,634

Beaver Beaver

181,412 $36,995 $18,402 35.8%

4,775 $42,113 $24,003


Blair Altoona

129,144 $32,851 $16,743 38.0%

49,523 $28,248 $15,213

Butler Cranberry

174,083 $42,308 $20,798 39.5%

23,625 $66,588 $27,349

Erie Erie (3 Rinks)

280,843 $36,627 $17,932 42.1%

103,717 $28,387 $13,972

Lawrence New Castle

94,643 $33,152 $16,835 36.8%

26,309 $25,598 $13,730

Neshannock Twp.

9,216 $40,988 $25,312

Washington Washington

202,897 $37,607 $19,935 35.8%

15,268 $25,674 $14,818

Canonsburg Second

Rink

8,607 $31,184 $17,469

Fayette Connellsville

148,644 $27,451 $15,274 36.9%

9,146 $21,070 $14,165 Population of Counties without Ice Rinks

Clarion

41,765 Warren

48,863 Somerset

80,023

Greene

40,672 Forest

4,946 McKean 45,936

Mercer

120,293 Jefferson

45,932 Cameron 5,974

Venango

57,565 Clearfield

83,382 Elk 35,112

The following observations are made from this chart:

• White Township ranks fifth in terms of median household income of the communities with ice rinks, and third in per capita income.

• Indiana County ranks tenth, out of twelve counties, for both median household income and per capita income.

• Indiana County has the largest percentage of population age 5-34 of all the Counties considered. The County outpaces the State in this category by 4.2%.

Ice Skating Trends Finally, we looked at nationwide trends in the ice skating business. All statistics cited are taken from the National Sporting Goods Association Participation Survey2. The Survey shows the following:

• Participation in ice hockey increased by 28.9% from 1999 to 2004. • Participation by youth ages 7-17 increased by 26.6% between 1999 and 2004.

Participation increased by 33% of those ages 12-17 but decreased by 24.7% for those ages 7-11.

2 www.nsga.org


• Between 1994 and 2000 Ice/Figure Skating participation declined from 7.8 million to 6.7 million. Figures were not available through 2004.

• The median age of a male ice hockey player increased from 25.5 in 2001 to 27.1 in 2004. For women it increased from 28.3 to 33.5.

These trends tend to indicate that there is a significant increase in participation in ice hockey, but that there is also a slight shift upward in the age group that is participating.

Public Participation The IUP Feasibility Study did a very good job of collecting public input. Twenty-nine personal interviews were conducted with public officials, users and potential users of the Ice Center, local business owners, current staff of the Center, and athletic directors and facility managers from around the area. The IUP Study provides an in-depth description of each of the series of interviews, which includes specifics of the interviews as well as a general synopsis of each. A public meeting was held to hear comments concerning the potential acquisition of the facility by the Township. Approximately sixty people attended and offered numerous comments and suggestions. Two Letters to the Editor were published in the Indiana Gazette sharing concerns about the Township acquiring the Center. Copies of these letters are included in the IUP Report. Overall comments from the public were supportive of the project. Many interviewees offered good suggestions on ways to make the Center successful. Most thought that it would be very detrimental to the County to lose the Ice Center as one of the area’s key recreation facilities. There seemed to be three major concerns that were vocalized.

1. White Township residents do not want their taxes to increase to support the Ice Center.

2. Some business owners are concerned about an unfair advantage the facility may have in competing with local businesses.

3. Acquisition of a private facility will remove that property from the local tax rolls resulting in a loss of tax revenue to the Township, School District, and County.

The Consultant and the Township determined that it was not necessary to duplicate the efforts already undertaken in the original study to gather additional public input. However, two supplemental forms of considering public opinion were used. The Township worked with a host of interested local residents to hold a brainstorming session on ways to assure the financial success of the Ice Rink under Township ownership. Community leaders who are actively involved in various segments of the Indiana area were brought together on November 10, 2005 to think broadly about the Center and to


identify potential recreational activities, programs, and major events that might take place in the Center to assure financial viability. Following introductions, members participated in a brainstorming session. The resulting ideas were then sorted into three categories:

1. Immediate, with a major focus on generating revenue (December 2005-May 2006)

2. Intermediate (June 2006-May 2007) 3. Other

Several important points were identified during the discussion. The following is a summary of that discussion. Note: All ideas are listed at random within the appropriate category.

Immediate, with a major focus on generating revenue (December 2005-May 2006)

• Oldies Dances (November to March). Explore renting the facility to St. Bernard’s. • Harley B16 Metal Show • Cheerleading Competition - Winter activity. Charge entry fee. Pat Snyder could

find a contact. • Youth detention center use during the day • Offer a Family Skate price during Open Skate • Sell a Season Skate Pass for kids. Print the dates & times of Open Skate on the

pass. • Concerts – probably youth oriented. Eliminates travel and the negative

opportunities therein. • Band Concerts for youths • Battle of the Bands • Band Night featuring Garage Bands • Football Recruiting Night – Coaches could come in and look at kids from Indiana

County • Auctions – Note: Mike Charnego & Pete Stewart do not have their own facility • Craft Shows • Dances – Line, Square, Ballroom, Teenage Like Bubba’s in Latrobe and After

Burner in Hollidaysburg • Dances for older adults • Indoor Skate Park • Teen Night Open Skate • Dodge Ball Tournaments • Health Programs • Bingo - Not on Monday nights. • Remote Control Things – Cars, etc. • Frisbee Tournaments • Trivia Night – Good fundraiser. Local organizations/companies enter teams

@$25/person. A $500 prize goes to the winner’s choice of charity.


• Ice Hockey instructional camps • Preschool exercise program. “Ducky Club” for stay-at-home parents. • Weekend Soccer Tournaments – Charge $125/team • Sports Clinics • Ethnic Festivals • Roller Hockey League • Meeting Rooms for local clubs and organizations - Provide a locked storage

cabinet for each group. $50/room and $7/week for storage. Ask the Tourist Bureau to help market the opportunity. Internet access?

• “Specialty” Flea Market • After School Prom Night

Intermediate (June 2006-May 2007)

• RV Show • Trade/Travel Shows specific to a profession or industry. Example: oil and gas,

college nights, automobile • Car Show – Roadster Factory, contact Runyan • Deck Hockey (In-line) • Big Screen Movies • Power Lifting/Weight Lifting • Teen Center • Baseball League Wiffleball/Softball Charge $15/kid. 10 kids/team. Two games

could take place simultaneously. Optimist Club might consider becoming involved.

• Archery competitions? Air Rifle competitions. Maybe involve the PA Game Office or the Boy Scouts for names.

• Collector Expos/Shows – coin, stamp, baseball cards, antiques, guns, etc. Note: area must be locked with security guards inside when the show is not operating. Contact Indiana Bow & Gun Club

• Sport Show – ex. hunting and fishing • X-TREME Sports • Horse shows • Concerts – Rent the facility. Contract with a Promoter to manage the event. • Bike Show – Rent spaces to bike dealers • Indoor winter high school marching band practice site • Power Lifting Competition • Fantasy Hockey • Laser Light Show • Indoor Paintball • Site for P.I.A.A. Official Training and Testing (all sports) • Offer a Hockey 101 class to teach potential spectators about the sport • Family Sports Day • “Blue Angel” weekend dance night for students


• Seminars – rent the space to a company that needs to hold educational seminars in a central location

• Trade/Travel Shows • Youth exercise/gym complex • Aerobics (indoor walkers)

Other • All Night Prom – Big Entertainment. Bring 4+ schools together on the same

night. • Travel Expo – Contract with a tourism promoter • Health Expo • College Fair – Contract with Indiana County School Guidance Association. The

Center’s isolated location helps ensure better student control. • Indoor Sports with multi-purpose floor • Wedding Receptions • Family Reunions • Legion Baseball Banquet in late July

Important Points Generated During the Discussion

• It is important that the Center not be seen as unfairly competing with local businesses; therefore, space rental and programs such as Open Skate should be priced at "fair market value". In other words, rental and programming that is equal in cost to private businesses offers the public a choice of venue but does not unfairly entice customers by charging a lower price.

• Contract the space to a promoter or group for a price. Let the promoter be responsible for the event.

• Connect with IUP. The Center would be a good backup for events that the Regional Development Center is unable to host.

• Check with Labor & Industry regarding seating capacity and ability to provide safe exit to spectators in the event of an emergency.

• Electrical capacity may need to be enhanced for major shows/exhibits. • Consider changing the name, Indiana Ice and Expo Center, to more accurately

describe its expanded mission within Indiana County. • A major emphasis needs to be placed on publicizing programs and activities. • Naming rights for the facility and the portions thereof will assure immediate

financial stability. Additionally, the Consultant reviewed public input received as part of the Indiana County Comprehensive Recreation, Park, and Open Space Plan. Because the Indiana Ice Center was in full operation during the time of that study, there was nothing to suggest the need


for an ice arena in the County at that time. The Recreation Survey conducted as part of the Study, however, did show a need for community recreation centers and gyms in the County. In fact, these types of facilities rank as the ninth most needed facilities in the County. Programming, Administrative, and Operational Analysis The IUP Feasibility Study identifies existing programming in the facility and projects a variety of potential program offerings. The Report states, “The projections for…programs were developed through extensive interviews with interested parties, the public, and comparable facilities. We believe that rudimentary marketing activities such as direct selling, promotional tactics, and good customer relations can exploit these program possibilities. The fees that are used in this projection represent utilization of 70% of operating hours, at break even. The study team believes that the fees are subject to further negotiation in almost all cases.” The research conducted to develop these lists suggests a reasonably good likelihood of success for the programming. White Township officials have indicated that it is their intent to maintain the south rink as an ice rink and convert the north rink into a community recreation center. Costs to update the mechanical systems related to the ice rink and to convert the north rink to a recreation center are estimated in the IUP Study at $450,000. In order to allow for as much flexibility in use as possible, the recreation center should be maintained as a field house type facility. This will allow for a continual change of venue from one sport court to another. Basketball may be able to play at one end of the floor while volleyball is at another. For major events, the floors can be converted to a full sized court. As the seasons change the area can be realigned to create fields for floor hockey or soccer. The greater the potential for adaptability, the greater the likelihood of meeting the recreational needs of the community and producing the revenue needed to operate the facility. This type of a system will require additional equipment to make the conversion from one sport to another. The initial financial figures do not account for a system of divider netting to allow for multiple gymnasium uses in the recreation center. Nor do they plan for typical recreation equipment such as netting, goals, and fixtures that will be needed for individual sports. It is likely that an additional $50,000 to $100,000 will be needed to acquire and install divider nets and additional such recreation related equipment. The size of the available space in the north ice arena is adequate to be used for a variety of recreational purposes. These could include volleyball, basketball, floor hockey, soccer, and field hockey. It could also be used for indoor practices for football, baseball, softball, tennis, and other sports. The fact that there are bleachers, lockers, and a lobby area open up additional opportunities.


In addition to the recreational opportunities available in the recreation center portion of the building, the ice rink could be available to provide learn to skate, beginner ice hockey, figure skate instruction, senior skating, and more. The batting cages offer an additional opportunity as do the variety of meeting rooms in the facility. Arts classes, card tournaments, pre-school programs, and education classes for all ages could be provided. Possibilities to provide recreational opportunities in the Center are virtually endless.

Programming Options There are at least two programming options that should be considered. One would be to operate the recreation program primarily through facility rentals. The second would be to operate as a true community recreation facility by offering a well balanced recreation program supplemented by facility rentals. In the first option, the recreation center would be rented to local and regional recreation providers as a location for the programs they run through their organizations. This could mean renting to organizations such as the senior tennis league, IUP intramurals and intercollegiate sports, youth basketball, soccer associations, volleyball leagues, or the Indiana Area Recreation Commission. These organizations would pay a rental fee, provide their own equipment, and operate their own programs. Under this scenario, the Ice Center incurs very little overhead and requires little staff to manage the rentals. However, it is not likely that rentals can provide the extended utilization of the facility that will be needed to pay all the bills for the facility. Additionally, there may be significant deficiencies in available programming. For instance, it may be that no one is willing to rent the facility to provide learn to skate programs that could be vital to the long-term operation of the center, or that no one offers senior programs that are greatly needed in the community. Under the second option, the center is really intended to fulfill the community’s full recreational needs. A balance of programming offered by the Center, combined with rentals of the facility to recreation providers, provides the best options to the community, assures greater utilization of the facility, and has the potential to produce greater revenue. Under either option, it is not likely that sufficient revenues will be produced to cover the entire cost of operating the recreation center. Instead, it can be predicted that additional revenues will be provided to help offset the overall costs. The IUP Study projects a seventy percent utilization rate of the recreational facility. While it is possible that usage will eventually reach that level, it is most likely that it will only reach thirty to forty percent utilization. Budget figures proposed in the projected budget are based on the lower level of utilization.


Organizational Structure The following three organizational structures should be considered for operating the recreation programming of the Center.

• Use of existing or supplemental staff from the ice rink to manage rental of the recreation center. This would allow a clerical or administrative staff person to manage facility rentals of the recreation portion of the building. There would be little, if any, recreation programming provided. This would provide some additional income. It is not likely that rentals would be able to utilize the building more that 20% - 30% of the time. Additional staff may be needed to supervise the recreation building whenever it is being utilized.

• Hire supplemental staff to manage recreation center rentals and provide recreation programming. A staff person could be hired by the Ice Rink as a recreation director to manage rental of the recreation portion of the building and provide additional recreation programming to the community. This would provide a better utilization of the building. A trained, experienced recreation director could provide a well rounded recreation program available throughout much of the day. This could provide a good mix of recreation programming and facility rentals for recreational use. This option would compete with the Indiana Area Recreation Commission in the kinds of programs offered and the groups to whom they are available.

• Contract with the Indiana Area Recreation Commission to manage recreation center rentals and a full community recreation program. From a programmatic and utilization standpoint this may provide the best option. The Commission could move its offices to the Ice Rink and begin programming directly from there, utilizing the facility whenever possible. The two organizations would need to come to agreement on financial issues including setting of rental rates, collection of fees, use of the building, etc. There must also be agreement on the level of quality of programming, facilities, and customer service. A trained, experienced recreation director will be needed.

Staffing The IUP Study provides a good organizational chart and structure for staffing the Center for the Ice Rink. Staffing will need to be added for whichever of the above described organizational structures is chosen. The quality of staff in all positions at the facility will be key to its success. The Township has been wise in its current choices for the facility manager, and maintenance and clerical staff. As the program is expanded, the Township will need to consider that the Manager position will probably need to become full-time/year-round. Maintenance staff should be able to continue to share time in the parks.


The Recreation Director should be someone with a Bachelors degree in parks and recreation, recreation management, or a closely related field. He or she should have a minimum of five years experience and a proven record of success in this type of a setting.

Potential Partnerships

Indiana University of Pennsylvania The consultant has considered the role that might be played by IUP as a partner in the acquisition, management, or operation of this facility. White Township held an initial meeting with University officials in August, 2005 to discuss possible joint efforts. Four areas for possible cooperation were identified at that time. They include utilization of the University’s work study program to assist in staffing the Ice Center; an agreement for greater use of the facility by IUP intramural programs; provision of discounted electricity to the facility by the University, and; the University providing funding assistance regarding its hockey team and coaching. There may be other possible areas of cooperation as discussions continue. The Ice Center should continue to seek long-term commitments from the University for its use of the facility. Current rental of the facility by University programs provides significant revenue to the Center. Recent discussions between Township staff and University coaches, intramural staff, and administrative staff have shown that there are additional opportunities to expand these rentals. Several coaches have indicated an interest in renting the facility particularly for off-season and pre-season practices for their players. The University intramural program has shown a similar interest. A commitment from the University for these types of rentals would be a tremendous financial benefit to the Ice Center as it would secure a steady income stream at key times throughout the year. The consultant understands that IUP is continuing to review this matter and will be meeting with the Township in the near future.

Indiana Area Recreation Commission Indiana Area Recreation Commission is a key provider of recreational services in Indiana Borough and White Township. The organizational structure section of this report recommends that the Ice Center consider a cooperative arrangement to work with the Commission to provide recreational programming through the Ice Center.

Indiana County Parks This type of facility does not fit within the Mission of the Indiana County Parks. There is therefore no opportunity for partnership with them.

Public Private Partnerships In some cases it can be feasible to consider partnerships with the private sector to lease parts of the facility or to provide services through the public facility. In the case of the Ice Center, if it is acquired with DCNR funding, there is no opportunity to lease the building or portions of it to private sector businesses. It may, however, be a possibility


to lease time in the facility to private facilities such as a hospital, industry, or business to hold specific classes or programs in the building.

Financial Analysis The IUP Feasibility Study conducted an in-depth analysis of the historic financial records of the Indiana Ice Center. The Study provides an analytical breakdown of each major income and expense category. Pashek Associates reviewed this analysis and found it to be an accurate representation of current owner’s financial history. It is reasonable to assume that financial projections can be made for the future of the Center based on this history. It must be understood that these projections are based on the best information available and take into account the proposed changes at the facility. However, many factors, both internal and external, will have a significant impact on the Center’s financial future. Economic conditions, recreational trends, management styles, staff expertise, changes in elected officials, operating philosophies, and much more will impact the financial future of the Center. The projections offer a reasonable estimate of what might be expected for the future of the Ice Center in White Township, assuming a slow but steady increase in usage of both the ice and recreation sides of the facility. Based on Pashek Associates’ analysis of the financial data, the following changes have been made from the IUP Study’s financial projections.

1. Changed the year titles from calendar years to numbered years. 2. Reduced the projected increase in 2006 for all Rink operations from 20% to 10%. 3. Added a line item for Recreation Revenue of $50,000. 4. Revised payroll projections to more accurately reflect what is actually expected

and discussed in the IUP Study. 5. Added a Payroll line item for recreation salaries. 6. Changed the line item previously titled FICA Taxes to Payroll Taxes and

estimated it at 12% of payroll. Other payroll costs are included in the individual payroll line items.

7. Reduced the General Liability Insurance line item to reflect the figure provided to the Township by its current insurance carrier.

8. Corrected an error in the formula used to calculate years 2007-2009 of the Commercial Bank Loan Repayment line item.

The results project a net of expenses over revenue in Year 1 and Year 2 of $28,167 and $12,703 respectively and revenues over expenses of $342, $16,342, and $35,906 in Years 3, 4, and 5 respectively. The Township may also want to consider charging both a resident and a non-resident rate to facility users depending on their location of residence.



It will be absolutely essential to operate the entire facility under sound business principles. The business concept is often misunderstood by local governments who tend to see themselves as providers of services rather than operators of a business. However, if handled appropriately, the Ice Center can offer a good balance between providing a community service and operating under sound business practices. A business approach to management needs to encompass all aspects of operations including admission fees, operational expenses, staffing, programming, marketing, and much more. Close attention should be paid to the Pro Shop and Food Concessions to assure that they operate with revenues exceeding expenses, including staffing. The Pro-shop and Food Concession should earn a profit every year. The profit should be at least 10% of operating expenses with a target profit of 20%. Staffing, product selection, pricing, and inventory control must be appropriately managed to ensure profitability. Inventory management and a system of financial controls should be of utmost importance. Typical business practice should be adopted to assure that all money and inventory are accounted for on a daily basis Most products at the concession stand should be high profit items such as premix pop, popcorn, sno-cones, and Popsicles. This should be supplemented out with mid-profit items such as candy bars, pizza slices, ice cream bars, and canned drinks. Low profit items such as hotdogs, nachos, and hot pretzels should be avoided. Sale of penny candy should be avoided as well due to problems with inventory control and low profitability. Product pricing should be set to return an adequate profit while not exploiting patrons. Prices should be competitive with other locations in town. The purpose of the concession stand should be to earn a profit while providing a service to patrons. The Food Concession may need to be supplemented with vending machines that eliminate the need for staffing during slower periods of use. It may be difficult for the Pro-shop to compete with the wide variety of discount and internet sporting goods stores available in today’s economy. It may be that the only skating supply items that need to be made available to users of the rink can be sold at the Food Concession stand, skate sharpening area, or through vending machines. The following pages detail the projected revenues and disbursements.

Indiana Ice and Expo Center Projected Cash Flow Statement

Cash Receipts

Start-Up 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Totals

CASH FROM SALES Rink Operations

PR-Adult Hockey $12,135.00 $13,348.50 $14,015.93 $14,716.72 $15,452.56 $69,668.70 PR-Youth Hockey $199,616.00 $219,577.60 $230,556.48 $242,084.30 $254,188.52 $1,146,022.90 PR- Figure Skating $108.00 $118.80 $124.74 $130.98 $137.53 $620.04

PR-Groups $3,846.00 $4,230.60 $4,442.13 $4,664.24 $4,897.45 $22,080.41 Roller Hockey $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Soccer Income $9,561.00 $10,517.10 $11,042.96 $11,595.10 $12,174.86 $54,891.02

Recreation Revenue $50,000.00 $55,000.00 $57,750.00 $60,637.50 $63,669.38 $287,056.88 Skate Rental $2,698.00 $2,967.80 $3,116.19 $3,272.00 $3,435.60 $15,489.59 Admissions $11,093.00 $12,202.30 $12,812.42 $13,453.04 $14,125.69 $63,686.44

Other Income $4,381.00 $4,819.10 $5,060.06 $5,313.06 $5,578.71 $25,151.92

Rink Operations Total $0.00 $293,438.00 $322,781.80 $338,920.89 $355,866.93 $373,660.28 $1,684,667.91

Pro Shop

Skate Sharpening $1,603.00 $1,923.60 $2,019.78 $2,120.77 $2,226.81 $9,893.96 Merch- Clothing $1,768.00 $2,121.60 $2,545.92 $3,055.10 $3,666.12 $13,156.75

Merch-Equip $13,787.00 $16,544.40 $19,853.28 $23,823.94 $28,588.72 $102,597.34 Merch- Soccer Equip $51.00 $61.20 $73.44 $88.13 $105.75 $379.52

Misc. $14.00 $16.80 $20.16 $24.19 $29.03 $104.18

Pro Shop Total $0.00 $17,223.00 $20,667.60 $24,512.58 $29,112.13 $34,616.44 $126,131.75

Sales Concession

Sales Concession $48,342.00 $58,010.40 $69,612.48 $83,534.98 $100,241.97 $359,741.83 Concession Rental $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Concession Food $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Sales Concessions Total $0.00 $48,342.00 $58,010.40 $69,612.48 $83,534.98 $100,241.97 $359,741.83


Advertising Income

Advertising Income $14,108.00 $16,929.60 $17,776.08 $18,664.88 $19,598.13 $87,076.69

Advertising Income Total $0.00 $14,108.00 $16,929.60 $17,776.08 $18,664.88 $19,598.13 $87,076.69

Expo Revenue

Expo Rental $6,113.00 $7,335.60 $7,702.38 $8,087.50 $8,491.87 $37,730.35 Home Show $8,241.00 $9,889.20 $10,383.66 $10,902.84 $11,447.99 $50,864.69

Expo Revenue Total $0.00 $14,354.00 $17,224.80 $18,086.04 $18,990.34 $19,939.86 $88,595.04

Additional Revenue Sources

Room Rental $50.00 $60.00 $63.00 $66.15 $69.46 $308.61 Batting Cage Rev $3,000.00 $3,600.00 $3,780.00 $3,969.00 $4,167.45 $18,516.45

Locker Room $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Commissions-Vendors $4,277.00 $5,132.40 $5,389.02 $5,658.47 $5,941.39 $26,398.29

Additional Revenue Sources Total $0.00 $7,327.00 $8,792.40 $9,232.02 $9,693.62 $10,178.30 $45,223.34

TOTAL CASH FROM SALES $0.00 $394,792.00 $444,406.60 $478,140.09 $515,862.89 $558,234.98 $2,391,436.56

Cash From Financing

Commercial Loan Proceeds $300,000.00 $150,000.00

TOTAL CASH FROM FINANCING $300,000.00 $0.00 $150,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $450,000.00

Total Cash Receipts

TOTAL CASH RECEIPTS $300,000.00 $394,792.00 $594,406.60 $478,140.09 $515,862.89 $558,234.98 $2,841,436.56


Cash Disbursements Start-Up 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Totals

Payroll Rink Supervisors Salaries $20,000.00 $21,000.00 $22,050.00 $23,152.50 $24,310.13 $110,512.63

Instructors Salaries $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Maintenance Salaries $30,000.00 $31,500.00 $33,075.00 $34,728.75 $36,465.19 $165,768.94 Recreation Salaries $25,000.00 $26,250.00 $27,562.50 $28,940.63 $30,387.66 $138,140.78

Rink Operations Salaries $14,000.00 $14,700.00 $15,435.00 $16,206.75 $17,017.09 $77,358.84 Concession Worker Salaries $18,000.00 $18,900.00 $19,845.00 $20,837.25 $21,879.11 $99,461.36

Administrative Salaries $36,000.00 $37,800.00 $39,690.00 $41,674.50 $43,758.23 $198,922.73 Rink Operations Salaries-Referees $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Housekeeping Salaries $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Marketing/Sales Salaries $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Consulting Services $7,000.00 $7,350.00 $7,717.50 $8,103.38 $8,508.54 $38,679.42

Payroll Total $0.00 $150,000.00 $157,500.00 $165,375.00 $173,643.75 $182,325.94 $828,844.69

Utilities

Electric $60,000.00 $63,000.00 $66,150.00 $69,457.50 $72,930.38 $331,537.88

Gas $35,000.00 $36,750.00 $38,587.50 $40,516.88 $42,542.72 $193,397.09 Water / Sewage $10,000.00 $10,500.00 $11,025.00 $11,576.25 $12,155.06 $55,256.31

Telephone $4,000.00 $4,200.00 $4,410.00 $4,630.50 $4,862.03 $22,102.53 Internet Fees $1,500.00 $1,575.00 $1,653.75 $1,736.44 $1,823.26 $8,288.45

Garbage Pickup $750.00 $787.50 $826.88 $868.22 $911.63 $4,144.22

Utilities Total $0.00 $111,250.00 $116,812.50 $122,653.13 $128,785.78 $135,225.07 $614,726.48

Taxes

Payroll Taxes $18,000.00 $18,900.00 $19,845.00 $20,837.25 $21,879.11 $99,461.36

Unemployment -Federal $0.00 Unemployment - State $0.00 Workers Compensation $0.00

Tax Total $0.00 $18,000.00 $18,900.00 $19,845.00 $20,837.25 $21,879.11 $99,461.36


Pro Shop Expenses

Costs of Goods Sold-Clothing $1,705.00 $1,790.25 $1,879.76 $1,973.75 $2,072.44 $9,421.20

Costs of Goods Sold-Equipment $6,937.00 $7,283.85 $7,648.04 $8,030.44 $8,431.97 $38,331.30 Costs of Goods Sold-Misc. $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Cost of Goods Sold-Soccer Equip $2,500.00 $2,625.00 $2,756.25 $2,894.06 $3,038.77 $13,814.08

Pro Shop Expenses Total $0.00 $11,142.00 $11,699.10 $12,284.06 $12,898.26 $13,543.17 $61,566.58

Insurance

General Liability Insurance $10,000.00 $10,500.00 $11,025.00 $11,576.25 $12,155.06 $55,256.31

Insurance Total $0.00 $10,000.00 $10,500.00 $11,025.00 $11,576.25 $12,155.06 $55,256.31

Maintenance & Repairs

Building Maintenance & Repairs $6,488.00 $6,812.40 $7,153.02 $7,510.67 $7,886.20 $35,850.30 Maintenance Supplies $2,538.00 $2,664.90 $2,798.15 $2,938.05 $3,084.95 $14,024.05

Housekeeping Supplies $3,614.00 $3,794.70 $3,984.44 $4,183.66 $4,392.84 $19,969.63 Equipment Maintenance $12,345.00 $12,962.25 $13,610.36 $14,290.88 $15,005.42 $68,213.92

Maintenance & Repairs Total $0.00 $24,985.00 $26,234.25 $27,545.96 $28,923.26 $30,369.42 $138,057.90

Concession Expenses

Costs of Goods Sold-Concession $27,066.00 $28,419.30 $29,840.27 $31,332.28 $32,898.89 $149,556.74

Concession Expense Total $0.00 $27,066.00 $28,419.30 $29,840.27 $31,332.28 $32,898.89 $149,556.74

Advertising

General Advertising $11,843.76 $12,435.95 $13,057.75 $13,710.63 $14,396.16 $65,444.25

Advertising Total $0.00 $11,843.76 $12,435.95 $13,057.75 $13,710.63 $14,396.16 $65,444.25

Contracted Services

Referee $9,230.00 $9,691.50 $10,176.08 $10,684.88 $11,219.12 $51,001.58 EMT $1,160.00 $1,218.00 $1,278.90 $1,342.85 $1,409.99 $6,409.73 Misc. $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Contracted Services Total $0.00 $10,390.00 $10,909.50 $11,454.98 $12,027.72 $12,629.11 $57,411.31


Tournament Expense

Tournament Expense $11,624.00 $12,205.20 $12,815.46 $13,456.23 $14,129.04 $64,229.94

Tournament Expense Total $0.00 $11,624.00 $12,205.20 $12,815.46 $13,456.23 $14,129.04 $64,229.94

Rink Expenses

Rink Equipment Expense $2,254.00 $2,366.70 $2,485.04 $2,609.29 $2,739.75 $12,454.77 Rink Supplies $228.00 $239.40 $251.37 $263.94 $277.14 $1,259.84

Equipment Rental-Rink $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Rink Expenses Total $0.00 $2,482.00 $2,606.10 $2,736.41 $2,873.23 $3,016.89 $13,714.62

Office Expenses

Office Equipment Rental $1,000.00 $1,050.00 $1,102.50 $1,157.63 $1,215.51 $5,525.63

Office Main & Repair $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Office Supplies $605.00 $635.25 $667.01 $700.36 $735.38 $3,343.01

Postage/Express Mail $40.00 $42.00 $44.10 $46.31 $48.62 $221.03

Office Expense Total $0.00 $1,645.00 $1,727.25 $1,813.61 $1,904.29 $1,999.51 $9,089.66

Dues and Subscriptions

Dues and Subscriptions $850.00 $892.50 $937.13 $983.98 $1,033.18 $4,696.79

Professional Dues $450.00 $472.50 $496.13 $520.93 $546.98 $2,486.53

Dues and Subscriptions Total $0.00 $1,300.00 $1,365.00 $1,433.25 $1,504.91 $1,580.16 $7,183.32

Misc.

Miscellaneous Expenses $130.00 $136.50 $143.33 $150.49 $158.02 $718.33

Other Supplies $641.00 $673.05 $706.70 $742.04 $779.14 $3,541.93 Travel Expense $154.00 $161.70 $169.79 $178.27 $187.19 $850.95 Licensing Fees $1,251.00 $1,313.55 $1,379.23 $1,448.19 $1,520.60 $6,912.56

Building Security $150.00 $157.50 $165.38 $173.64 $182.33 $828.84

Misc. $0.00 $2,326.00 $2,442.30 $2,564.42 $2,692.64 $2,827.27 $12,852.62

OTHER DISBURSEMENTS Commercial Bank Loan Payment $28,903.00 $43,354.00 $43,354.00 $43,354.00 $43,354.00 $202,319.00

Concrete Floor Installation $48,500.00 $48,500.00


Multipurpose Flooring

$105,000.00 $105,000.00 Cooling Tower $85,000.00 $85,000.00

Construction Costs of Storage Area $41,700.00 $41,700.00 Basketball Hoops (Portable) $8,000.00 $8,000.00 Misc. Maintenance Repairs $10,000.00 $10,000.00

Chiller Replacement $150,000.00 $150,000.00

Total Other Disbursements $298,200.00 $28,903.00 $193,354.00 $43,354.00 $43,354.00 $43,354.00 $650,519.00

TOTAL CASH DISBURSED $298,200.00 $422,956.76 $607,110.45 $477,798.27 $499,520.48 $522,328.81 $2,827,914.77

NET CASH FLOW $1,800.00 ($28,164.76) ($12,703.85) $341.82 $16,342.40 $35,906.17 $13,521.79

Opening Cash Balance

$0.00 $1,800.00 ($26,364.76) ($39,068.61) ($38,726.79) ($22,384.39) ($124,744.54) Cash Receipts $300,000.00

$394,792.00 $594,406.60 $478,140.09 $515,862.89 $558,234.98 $2,841,436.56Cash Disbursements

($298,200.00) ($422,956.76) ($607,110.45) ($477,798.27) ($499,520.48) ($522,328.81) ($2,827,914.77)

ENDING CASH BALANCE $1,800.00 ($26,364.76) ($39,068.61) ($38,726.79) ($22,384.39) $13,521.79


Conclusion There are no strong indicators pushing conclusions of this venture toward either success or failure. Rather there are many factors that are very much down the middle. While the population of the County is smaller than might normally be expected for success of this type of operation, the extremely large population under age 35 suggests a much greater likelihood of success. The less than successful operation of this facility in the private sector in recent years might lead to the conclusion that the facility cannot be successful. But the strong commitment by the Township and the support of area residents suggests that the demand may be high enough for success. The comparison to similar facilities in rural western Pennsylvania counties shows that about half have been successful in operating in the private sector. Those that are operated by municipalities are financially successful in some years and not in others. Based on this analysis, the conclusion that can be drawn is that in some years the revenues produced at the Indiana Ice and Recreation Center will exceed expenses and in other years expenses will exceed revenue. It is certainly feasible for White Township to own and operate the Indiana Ice and Recreation Center under these circumstances.


feasibilty study

Documents

ice facilities

ice rinks

indiana borough

ice hockey

ice skating facilities

indiana county ymca

indiana county fall

ice skating industry