I generally avoid commenting on commissioner’s committee meetings. Wednesday’s Intergovernmental Committee meeting is an exception. Attending the Intergovernmental Committee meeting from the County were Commissioners Terry Garrison, Tommy Hester, and Archie Taylor and the County Manager Jerry Asycue. The Commissioners guests were City Council Member Michael Inscoe and City Manager Ray Griffin. The duration of the meeting was an hour and fifteen minutes. The purpose of the meeting was for Commissioner’s Intergovernmental Committee to hear the City’s proposal to swap responsibility for the jointly owned Parks and Recreation Department.
A little history is important for those curious why the City is willing to relinquish control of Parks and Recreation. Transferring control of Parks and Recreation has not been publicly discussed in either City Council or County Commissioners meetings until the April 14th, City Council meeting. Mr. Inscoe asked to have “a discussion and possibly some action regarding the joint funding between Vance County and the City of Henderson on parks and recreation.”, added to the agenda. (http://homeinhenderson.com/2014/04/16/news/city-business/audio-city-of-henderson-city-council-meeting-april-14th-2014. Audio time stamp 3:45 – 4:04.) During the Report segment of the meeting, Mr. Inscoe’s proposed reducing the City’s budgetary contribution for Parks and Recreation by 15% over the next two fiscal years and increasing the County’s contribution by the same 15% effectively transferring control to the County. (Audio time stamp 1:18:18 – 1:32:30) Mr. Inscoe added that for the next two fiscal years both the County and City would continue to pay their equal share on the debt incurred to build the Aycock Recreation facility. Mr. Griffin requested the Council make Mr. Inscoe’s proposal a resolution that allowed Mr. Inscoe to presentation the proposal to the County. The resolution included allowing making Mr. Inscoe the City’s emissary to the County.
Wednesday’s Committee meeting opened with Mr. Inscoe speaking about the City’s proposal to transfer control of Parks and Recreation from the City to the County. Mr. Inscoe hinted during his opening comments as to the difficulty for the city to pay their 55% contribution. He also says his fellow council members (now) believe Parks and Recreation should be something the county should operate. Mr. Garrison was first to speak asking, “Do we have this in writing. Do you have a written proposal?” Mr. Inscoe quickly handed out a one page sheet of paper with the heading Recreation and Parks Proposal. The paper has the look a list of talking points. The sheet of paper was devoid of dollar and detail information, a letter head and the Mayor’s signature. Mr. Garrison said the proposal is worthy of study adding there are a lot of questions that need answering before we can intelligently entertain such an idea. Mr. Taylor was at first anxious to move forward on the proposal saying due diligence could be completed within two or three weeks. Mr. Asycue said his first priority is to complete and finalization the budget by the end of June indicating he lacked time and resources to conduct the necessary due diligence. Mr. Hester said the total change is only 10% in funding implying this is only a simple monetary transfer. Maybe he just overlooked the additional 5% in year two after the transfer.
The Committee finally agreed to advise the whole Board to consider the City’s proposal subject to necessary due diligence. For all the details listen to the audio. http://homeinhenderson.com/2014/04/23/news/county-business/audio-vance-county-intergovernmental-recreation-april-23rd-2014/
Hopefully these and other questions will be explored during the period of due diligence.
How does the County afford 60% of the operating cost when the City is struggling to pay 55%?
How many parks and where are they located?
What are the physical conditions of these parks?
What is the cost to operate and maintain the parks and facilities?
What maintenance issues have been ignored overtime that no longer be ignored?
Why does the City see need to relinquish the prestige that comes with managing Parks and Recreation?