PORTLAND PARKS ATLAS — WORK PAPERS FROM THE 2025 PARKS FISCAL MANAGEMENT AUDIT

City of Portland Audit Services shared these two work papers with Portland Civic Lab on
October 28, 2026, in answer to questions about the October 2025 audit "Parks Fiscal
Management: Systemwide goals and sustainability." They are published here unchanged so
readers can check what the Atlas says about them. Audit Services does not endorse the
Atlas or its analysis.

The audit itself:
https://www.portland.gov/auditor/audit-services/news/2025/10/15/parks-fiscal-management-systemwide-goals-and-sustainability

FILES
C-01-009-asset-management-interview-2024-09-16.docx
    The audit team's notes of its September 16, 2024 interview with PP&R's asset
    management manager, with four screenshots he shared. Three show PP&R's in-house
    Excel model, "Asset_Forecast_v1": its condition forecast at $750 million and at
    $1 billion of investment, and its data tab (condition rating, replacement cost,
    failure consequence, risk score and useful life for each asset). The fourth shows a
    fallen transformer.

D-02-00-01-funding-documentation-review.docx
    The work paper behind the audit's finding that none of eight new capital projects
    had a funding plan for their upkeep. It tests each project against FIN 2.03 (cost
    estimates; a funding plan in the adopted budget) and FIN 2.19 (recommend only
    projects with the resources to run, maintain and replace them), and records each
    project's funding, spending by summer 2024 and estimates. Reviewed by the Director
    of Audit Services on September 12, 2025. Its links point to Audit Services' internal
    drive and do not open outside the City.

ppr-asset-forecast-2024-09-16.jpg
    The chart from the first screenshot, cropped by the Atlas so it can be read on the
    web. Nothing else in the image was changed.

WHAT THE ATLAS TAKES FROM THEM
- In the model shown, 14% of PP&R's assets were good or very good, 51% fair and 35%
  bad or very bad. Fair plus bad or very bad is 86%, the figure the audit reports as
  "poor or very bad," and the manager described the fair group as "poor." The Atlas
  reads the 86% as counting fair assets; PP&R has not confirmed this.
- The model projects 89% bad or very bad after ten years with no funding, 28% with
  $750 million and 14% with $1 billion.
- The annual major-maintenance and lifecycle estimates for the five projects that had
  them (about $4.7 million a year together) were formulas: 3% of the project budget for
  major maintenance, and the budget divided by 20 years (40 for Old Town Skatepark) for
  replacement. The auditor asked whether either was enough.

The Atlas pages that use these: /condition, /how-parks-works, and the park pages for
Creston, Laurelhurst, Mill, North Park Blocks, Parklane and University parks.