Laserfiche WebLink
considering the financial condition of the Recreation Department. Ms. Drenski stated that it was <br />her opinion employees should receive a discount. Employee should be defined as a City or <br />Recreation Department employee. Mr. Brooks asked about opening classes that weren’t full to <br />employee families. Ms. Drenski stated there isn’t a problem with filling in a class to get it to run, <br />but the problem was that employee family members were not paying anything. Ms. Hayes said <br />that it was necessary to see a copy of current policy on the “We Care Program.” It was the <br />Commission’s consensus that a discount for employee members is in order, but free admission for <br />any program should be eliminated. <br /> <br />Mr. Gareau and Chairman Hayes asked Ms. Drenski about the nepotism issue. Ms. Drenski <br />replied that the issue developed with Todd Morgan hiring his wife as swim team coach, and that <br />there are a lot of parents and children working together as supervisor/employee teams. She did <br />not know if there was a “problem” with this per se; only that there might be a conflict with these <br />teams. Ms. Hayes asked if there were complaints on the issue and if there was a policy <br />established by the City of North Olmsted regarding nepotism. Mr. Gareau replied he was sure <br />there was a policy in place and stated that there were family members working for the City in <br />various capacities in areas apart from family members. He did not know that it ever came up as a <br />complaint, but the perception might be that because they were relatives they would get better <br />treatment, which is inherent in any employment setting. <br /> <br />Mr. Gareau then began discussing the hiring of the new Recreation Commissioner. He indicated <br />that he had spoken with the Director of Law and former Safety Director regarding this issue. The <br />role of the Recreation Commission in the hiring of the new Recreation Commissioner is not clear. <br />He pulled a copy of the Charter and the Administrative Code, which defines the job duties of the <br />Recreation Commissioner and defines the powers of the Recreation Commission. <br /> <br />The Charter of 1970 reads that: <br /> <br /> “The powers and duties of the Parks and Recreation Commission shall be: <br /> <br /> … Develop and approve all recreation programs under the control of the <br /> City of North Olmsted. … Prepare and recommend to Council all budgets <br /> for the Division of Parks and Recreation. … Approve, for implementation <br /> by the Department of Public Safety, all City park maintenance, capital <br /> improvements and development projects within the budgets approved <br /> by Council. … Establish employment policy for the Division of Parks and <br /> Recreation. … Such other duties as may be provided by ordinance of Council.” <br /> <br />We’re not entirely sure what “establishing employment policy for the Division of Parks and <br />Recreation” is. What the employee benefits are with regard to family employment and discounts <br />might be part of this policy. Criteria for employment and putting together a job application <br />should be considered to be within the scope of the Commission. There is thought that the <br />Commissioner should be hired either on the basis of his recreation program knowledge and <br />experience or on the basis of financial and administrative knowledge and experience. Should we <br />bring in a Commissioner who has a recreation degree or a “number cruncher” who handles the <br />financial end and lets the program supervisors handle the recreation programs. Jim Dubelko and I <br />will pursue this matter further. Ms. Hayes said that, from an historical perspective, the <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />