CC 2017-11-14_12a Supplemental No 1MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: SHERIDAN BOHLKEN, INTERIM RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
AGENDA ITEM 12.a-NOVEMBER 14, 2017 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE THE REORGANIZATION OF THE
RECREATION SERVICES DEPARTMENT
DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2017
Attached is correspondence received today regarding the above referenced agenda
item.
cc: City Manager
City Attorney
City Clerk
Public Review Binder
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
James Guthrie
Tuesday, November 14,-2017 11 :42 AM
Jim Hill; Kristen Barneich; Caren Ray; Tim Brown; Barbara Harmon
Jim Bergman; Kelly Wetmore
Reorganization of the Recreation department
Honorable Mayor and Council :
For the most part, I agree that the reorganization of the Recreation Department will bring more clarity to the operation
and improve lines of responsibility. I do have a couple of concerns and a few quibbles.
My primary concern is that this is a status quo decision and this is not a time for the status quo. In the future, if you
choose to change the scope of recreation services you will find that the fixed cost of the administrative positions you
add now will reduce if not eliminate any savings.
My second concern is the maintenance of the Recreation Director in the organization chart. I realize that you are not
actually making the decision to fill the position tonight but I could almost write the staff report where is says on
11/14/2017 the council approved the position of Recreation Director and we are proud to announce the appointment of
Here are a few quibbles;
Why is youth wrestling a special priority?
Is there adult recreation other than Soft Ball and could it be more like little league and just be a facility allocation?
What is unique about the BBQ, park rentals and the community gardens that they are administered by the
Administrative Secretary?
The Volunteer program coordinator position is still on the chart but the staff report suggests that it will be absorbed by
the Recreation director?
The staff report references the change from full-time Administrative Sectary as a cost-saving measure, but there is a
little more to it than that. The primary reason for eliminating the position was that she was willing to retire and several
other employees salaries were relocated to her duties. I doubt they actually performed them but it made other areas of
the recreation department appear more cost-effective. _
The wolf is not at the door as it was in in 2008-09 but he is in the vicinity. You will be making a number of difficult
choices in the next budget cycles and the more choices and clarity you have the better. This reorganization brings some
clarity but probably reduces your choices. I would recommend adding the full-time Administrative sectary and ask staff
to consider the reorganization as part of the next budget cycle and at least consider eliminating the Recreation Director.
10-15 years ago we did not have on a director and if I remember correctly it was another reorganization that brought it
about. Today, and in the future, there will be less city-sponsored recreation and the department should reflect that.
Jim Guthrie
1