Laserfiche WebLink
Page 2 of 3 <br /> <br />Council to consider regarding the recreation function. Attached is an example of Recreation <br />Programming offered by the City in 2019 (see Attachment A). Note, the programming found in <br />the example guide is typically more than what a City of our size would offer, but less than our <br />surrounding larger cities that have dedicated recreation facilities. Generally, this level of <br />programming has been overseen by two full-time City employees: a Recreation Coordinator to <br />oversee the administrative piece of the programming, and a Recreation Programmer to assist <br />with the day-to-day aspects of the programming to include: training and supervision of seasonal <br />staff, on-site monitoring, assuming instructor duties when needed, etc. <br /> <br />The Recreation Programmer has reviewed the recreation programs offered by the City and <br />provided the attached synopsis regarding participation and popularity of the programs (see <br />Attachment B). The City Council will want to discuss and consider its program offerings, and <br />whether or not it wants to maintain, grow or reduce the programming being offered. <br /> <br />Should the City want to maintain or grow the programs being offered, it is recommended the <br />City have at least two full-time employees to oversee the programming. However, should the <br />City want to reduce the programming to keep the “core” programs and reduce the less popular <br />programs, less full-time staffing may be needed. The Recreation Programmer has drafted a <br />program offering (see Attachment C) that would retain the popular programs, shed the unpopular <br />programs, and could be managed by one full-time person (with a few modifications, including <br />additional seasonal assistance during the busier months). The attachment also provides an <br />estimated revenue for the revised programming. Staff is assuming this would more or less be <br />offset with associated expenditures of the programs, i.e. programming will generally still be a net <br />zero for recreation revenues and direct expenses. Below is a summary table of recreation <br />revenues and expenditures since 2015, note this does NOT include full-time salaries and 2020 <br />was not included as programs were mostly eliminated. When considering full-time salaries, it <br />can be assumed that approximately $170,000 of General Fund expenses are not off-set by <br />associated recreation revenues. The savings associated with changes to the full-time positions <br />may not directly affect the recreation budget as some of those salaries are allocated elsewhere in <br />the General Fund, but they will all affect the General Fund as 100 percent of both salaries are <br />paid for via the General Fund. <br /> <br />Budget <br />2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2021 <br />Recreation Revenue 114,551 133,363 119,351 108,584 100,343 116,680 <br />Direct Expenses 109,236 128,146 101,449 109,380 94,360 119,060 <br />Net Difference 5,315 5,217 17,902 (796)5,983 (2,380) <br />Actual <br /> <br />At its May 26, 2020 City Council meeting, the City Council approved a temporary layoff of the <br />Recreation Coordinator position and this position continues to be in a temporary layoff status. <br />Should the Council want to reduce programming and retain one full-time person, Council would <br />need to take permanent action on recreation staffing. The current Recreation Programmer has <br />prepared an estimate of how time would be spent with one position (see Attachment D). A few <br />considerations if the City moves to one full-time recreation position: <br />• The full-time position would need to focus on the high-level duties, this position would <br />likely not be able to teach or lead recreation programming if needed.