Laserfiche WebLink
Minutes of a Meeting of the <br />North Olmsted Parks and Recreation Commission <br />December 5, 2005 <br /> <br /> <br />place. Mr. DiSalvo said that the Rec Department would keep things running, but it cannot replace <br />anything; it cannot afford it. Mr. Terbrack said that if there is a safety issue, obviously the City will <br />address the problem. Mr. Lasko said he thought it went back to a pure accounting question of <br />materiality. You have to determine what the threshold of materiality is, which is based upon a <br />numerical of some sort; he did not know what that threshold is, but anything below that number is <br />probably be deemed to be basically immaterial. But anything that would be of a material expense (and <br />Norm (Baxter) correct me if I’m wrong), even if might be an expenditure which by definition could be <br />considered to be repairs and maintenance, if it becomes such a significant number that it becomes <br />material, it becomes something that really moves out of a period expense (repairs and maintenance) <br />and becomes a capitalized item. If you’re talking about something that would truly be a capitalized <br />item that would materially extend, for example, the use of the life of a facility, then you have to stop <br />and think if it’s worth it, at least until the assessment phase of that study is done, and if the <br />recommendation during the assessment phase is that this building will never close for whatever reason, <br />then you would probably say, O.K., it’s now prudent to proceed with an item that is of a material <br />nature because the building is never going to close. Mr. Lasko continued that he thinks the Rec <br />Department is in that Limbo period right now. Mr. Baxter agreed. <br /> <br />Ms. Meredith asked if there were any capital improvements scheduled for next year with the new <br />budget. Mr. DiSalvo said that they have been scheduled but they haven’t been listed. The process is <br />just getting started. Ms. Meredith asked if the Rec Department would be going over this process with <br />the Consultants. The Commissioner said, “yes,” and continued by saying that it would make more <br />sense to him to put more into the parks than the building because the parks will always be there. Mr. <br />Miller said that it’s important to note that that list can change at the discretion of the Rec <br />Commissioner, unless the issue is a capital expenditure in which the item must come back to the <br />Commission. The Law Department has repeatedly reminded us this year that capital expenditures for <br />recreation must be approved by this Commission, and Mr. Miller suspected that, given the new <br />Council coming in this year, they will hold the Recreation Department and other departments that have <br />let deadlines go responsible for them. It hasn’t always been done that way; it will be done more so this <br />year. <br /> <br />Support From Recreation Commission <br /> <br />Mr. DiSalvo said it’s been a very challenging year for him, and he wanted to thank the Commission for <br />all its help and support. It’s been a busy year. <br /> <br />This concluded the Report of the Recreation Commissioner. <br />REPORT OF THE SAFETY DIRECTOR <br /> <br />Appointment of Tom Terbrack as Safety Director <br /> <br />Mr. Terbrack said that he did not have much to report at this time; he was just becoming familiar with <br />the job, having been working since Wednesday last. The Safety Director said that he has met with the <br />Recreation Commissioner a few times, so he hopes to be more forthwith in the future towards the <br />Page 5 <br /> <br />