4/7/2008 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minutes of a Meeting of the North Olmsted Parks and Recreation Commission April 7, 2008 them in position at the “Y”. That’s their plan at this point in time. We will learn more come Thursday. There are two hand-outs here for the Commission members. One is the article that appeared in The th Sun Herald a couple weeks ago on March 27 about the Y may run the Rec Center again and how Kim Wenger indicates that having partners, whoever it turns out to be, can defray costs and make it more affordable for the City. The presentation, as mentioned, is Thursday at 7:00. We expect a pretty full house; you may want to get there early. If you want, we have seats up front for Rec Commission members and Council will probably move up to the podium for questions and answers, and we’ll go from there. We expect it to be a full meeting. The other article is from the Metro Section of the Plain Dealer on April 4, 2004 on “Sweating how to pay for centers.” Most City-owned Recreation Centers lose money with revenues and expenses involved. It just comes to the point that the people have to make the decision of should cities be in the business of recreation and is it really a concern that they are making money in recreation. There are two schools of thought there. We will leave it up to the people when they go to vote to make that decision. It is the belief at City Hall that going this route long term will be the best way to go for the City. The City has looked at the cost of recreation, and it’s expensive. We know that if we partner with other entities it will cut the costs. We know that the YMCA is currently in negotiations with the City of North Royalton. They have an agreement with Avon. One failed down in southern Ohio in a city named Loveland, which is outside Cincinnati. That issue failed. They put it up before the voters once in May and then again in November 2007. It comes down to what the voters want to do. We will present the plan; we think it’s a good plan. Long term, we think it’s going to be a tax saver for the residents, but it will be up to the residents to decide. We hope to have the Rec Commission on board as we move forward with this, but we know everyone has their own personal decision to make as well, and Mr. Dailey respects that. Mr. Mahoney asked logistically how the Commission would be asked to weigh in on it. Mr. Dailey said it would be relatively quickly as Council discusses the same situation. Perhaps after this Thursday’s presentation, Council will have a chance to ask questions as they anticipate all the guests will have a chance to have questions. Mr. Dailey expects one or two more follow-up meetings to discuss this further. Obviously, legislation must go through City Council to get on the ballot by Finance Committee and Rec Committee. At that point time, he would expect to have something from Rec Commission by June. Mr. DiSalvo asked what would happen if Rec Commission did not approve this? Mr. Dailey said it was a referring body, may make suggestions yay or nay, and the City would still move forward with it. The City likes to move forward with Rec Commission on board; Rec Committee; City Council, and then to the voters. Page 6