Ejrp Governance Survey Results

Essex Junction Recreation and Parks Advisory Council
Recreation Governance Survey Results
On September 14, 2010, the EJRP Recreation Advisory Council opened up a survey for the community to comment on
the proposed governance change of EJRP from the school district to the Village.  The survey was closed on November 9,
2010.  208 individuals responded.  199 of the respondents identified themselves as residents of the Village of Essex
Junction.  The data that is presented below is derived from the responses by Village residents only.

Executive Summary (pg 1 of 2):

Question 1: Are you satisfied with EJRP staff, parks and programs?
85% Yes

8% Not Sure 7% No

• An overwhelming majority of people are satisfied with EJRP staff, parks, and programs

170 respondents said “yes”

o Most cited excellent, quality programming, a great staff, and well‐maintained parks and facilities.
o Citizens said that EJRP is an important/defining part of the community and provides a great service.
o Several people commented on the progressive nature of the department, noting it continuously improves.
o Several people said they did not have a single complaint and would not change anything.
o
29 “not sure” or “no”

o Respondents mentioned the baseball field, staff issues, a lack of/repeated program options, and high
budget/costs.

Question 2: Do you think having EJRP governed by the school district (current status) serves
our community well?
72% Yes 17% Not Sure 11% No
• Nearly 3 out of 4 respondents think that the current governance structure works well.

144 respondents said “yes”

o People appreciate the collaboration and integration that takes place with the schools and the
shared/coordinated use of facilities.
o The line “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” was mentioned ten times.
o Respondents noted that both organizations serve children, there is a common thread of recreation and
education, and that the recreation department provides excellent, quality programming.
o Several people said this is just about the baseball field.

55 said “not sure” or “no”

o Several people simply commented they are not sure.
o Others do not believe that recreation is a school function and that schools have enough on their plate.
o Some people had questions that they needed answered in order to make up their mind.

EJRP GOVERNANCE SURVEY RESULTS 2

Essex Junction Recreation and Parks Advisory Council
Recreation Governance Survey Results
Executive Summary (pg 2 of 2):

Question 3: Do you think transferring governance to the Village (proposed status) would serve
our community well?
36% Not Sure 51% No
13% Yes
• Half of the respondents do not feel a governance transfer would serve the community well
• 1/3 of respondents are not sure if a transfer would serve the community well

26 said “yes”
o People thought that it could be cost effective and that it is a municipal function.  Some people said that the
recreation department should be governed by citizens.  Others said schools should focus on schools.

173 respondents said “not sure” or “no”
o The most frequent response was, “it if ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” which was said in a variety of ways.
o Many felt that this was all about the baseball field.  The same number said that the Village already has too
much to do and can’t do it, why add recreation to it.
o People felt that either their taxes or recreation fees would go up if there was a transfer.  Some said that the
Village should put their efforts into more important things.
o Respondents state that recreation and the school educate and serve families and youth, while others noted
that the village does not have the infrastructure or expertise to operate rec.
o It was noted by several that currently recreation money is only used for recreation purposes and they were
concerned that it would not remain that way under Village governance.
o People did not see advantages to change and were concerned that program options and variety would be
reduced.
o Some who were unsure said that recreation is a municipal function.
o Some people wondered why so much attention was being given to an issue raised by so few people.

Question 4: What questions do you need answered in order to make an informed opinion
about the question of rec governance?
o 104‐respondents had questions.  Based on the nature of the question, questions were sent out to the Village of
Essex Junction (35 questions), Essex Junction Recreation and Parks (9 questions), the petitioners (Cindy Godin,
Jeff Harton, Joyce Stannard, Bob Willey) (5 questions) and Chittenden Central Supervisory Union (5 questions).
o There are a lot of unanswered questions.
o Many people commented that they do not see the impetus for change.
o There are a lot of unanswered questions related to how the Village would manage the recreation
department and many are not sure about the benefits of Village governance because those benefits have
not been presented.
o For some people, until they can compare the difference of governance from the school district to the Village,
they cannot make a determination.
o EJRP and CCSU provided responses to their questions.
o Neither the petitioners nor the Village provided any answers to any of the questions.

SURVEY:
Recreation Advisory Council Questions to the Essex Junction Community

We are proud to represent Essex Junction Recreation and Parks (EJRP). We are inspired by the people, the parks, and the programs.
EJRP serves our community well. We appreciate our 40‐year history of administration by the school district. It has fostered the
development and growth of a quality department. We are always seeking ways to improve our parks and programs for the community.
Some people have suggested that there be a governance change from the school board (Prudential Committee) to the Village of Essex
Junction (Board of Trustees). This important community decision requires a thorough process and comprehensive study. To gather your
opinion, we ask members of the Essex Junction community to weigh in on the following questions.

BEFORE taking this survey we encourage you to visit www.ejrp.org/governance to learn more about this topic. The Frequently Asked
Questions and the Petition Assertions and Counter Points should be particularly helpful.

Thanks for your time and opinion. It matters.
Essex Junction Recreation Advisory Council

1. Are you a resident of the Village of Essex Junction?
Yes
No
2. Are you satisfied with EJRP staff, parks and programs?
Yes Please explain:
Not Sure
No

3. Do you think having EJRP governed by the school district (current status) serves our community well?
Yes Please explain:
Not Sure
No

4. Do you think transferring governance to the Village (proposed status) would serve our community well?
Yes Please explain:
Not Sure
No

5. What questions do you need answered in order to make an informed opinion about the question of rec governance?

6. The following contact information is encouraged but optional. Your name will not be linked directly to your
answers. Your answers and comments will be shared in aggregate data. Your name may appear on public listings
of who completed the survey, but your contact information will not be shared.
Name
Phone
Address
Email
7. Do you want to receive future e‐mails about rec governance?
Yes
No

Questions? Contact Bridget Meyer, 879‐5409, bmeyer1038@aol.com


Question 1: Not sure
No
7%
8%

ARE YOU SATISFIED WITH
EJRP STAFF, PARKS &
PROGRAMS? Yes
85%
Of the 170 respondents that said “yes,” 71
provided comments or reasons:
EXCELLENT, QUALITY PROGRAMMING  (42)
Serving All Ages • Offering a Variety/Diversity • Affordable/Wise use of Resources

GREAT STAFF  (26)

WELL MAINTAINED PARKS & FACILITIES  (23)


IMPORTANT/DEFINING PART OF OUR COMMUNITY  (23)

Best in the State • A great asset to the community • Love the integration between EJRP and schools • Like the
coordination of programs between EJRP and schools • Hidden gem • Huge part of our family’s life • An amazingly
valuable resource • Community resource • This is why we live here • Enrich our community • Truly adds value to
living in this community • An asset to me as a homeowner • Brought us a feeling of a close community • Envy of
surrounding communities • Essential to my child’s education • Huge part of their childhood • Great community for
raising kids, in part due to the rec department • Like feeling as if my kids are with family when they are at rec

GREAT SERVICE TO COMMUNITY   (14)

PROGRESSIVE  (8)

                                    NOT A SINGLE COMPLAINT/WOULDN’T CHANGE ANYTHING  (7)

Of the 29 respondents that said “not sure” or “no,” 22 provided comments or concerns:
        BASEBALL FIELD (4)

        STAFF ISSUES (4)

    LACK OF, OR REPEATED PROGRAM OPTIONS (3)

    HIGH BUDGET/COSTS (3)


Question 2: No
11%

DO YOU THINK HAVING Not sure
17%
EJRP GOVERNED BY THE
SCHOOL DISCTICT Yes
(CURRENT STATUS) SERVES 72%
OUR COMMUNITY WELL?
Of the 144 respondents that said “yes,” 55
provided comments or reasons:
COLLABORATION/INTEGRATION WITH SCHOOLS (16)

IF IT AIN’T BROKE…  (10)

SHARED/COORDINATED USE OF FACILITIES (9)


BOTH ORGANIZATIONS SERVE CHILDREN  (9)


EXCELLENT, QUALITY PROGRAMMING  (7)
Serving all ages • Offering variety/diversity • Affordable

THIS IS JUST ABOUT THE BASEBALL FIELD (7)


WORRIED ABOUT WHAT MIGHT CHANGE (7)

COMMON THREAD OF REC. & ED.  (6)



NOT SURE  (8)


NOT A SCHOOL FUNCTION  (7)

SCHOOLS ARE BUSY  (4)


QUESTIONS  (4)


Question 3: Yes
13%

DO YOU THINK
No
TRANSFERRING GOVERNANCE
51% Not sure
TO THE VILLAGE (PROPOSED 36%

STATUS) WOULD SERVE OUR
COMMUNITY WELL?
Of the 26 respondents that said “yes,” 14 provided
comments or reasons:
    COULD BE COST EFFECTIVE (3)

             SHOULD BE GOVERNED BY VILLAGE RESIDENTS  (2)
        NOT SURE  (2)


           SCHOOLS SHOULD FOCUS ON SCHOOLS  (2)
                        A MUNICIPAL FUNCTION (2)


        IF IT AIN’T BROKE…  (27)

                   THIS IS JUST ABOUT THE BASEBALL FIELD  (11)

          VILAGE ALREADY HAS TOO MUCH TO DO, AND CAN’T DO THAT  (10)

          COSTS WILL GO UP (FEES AND/OR TAXES)  (10)

            REC & SCHOOLS BOTH EDUCATE AND SERVE FAMILIES & YOUTH (8)

            I DON’T SEE ANY ADVANTAGES/BENEFITS TO VILLAGE GOVERNANCE  (8)

         VILLAGE SHOULD PUT EFFORTS INTO MORE IMPORTANT THINGS  (6)

         REC MONEY SHOULD ONLY BE USED FOR REC PURPOSES  (6)

        CHANGE WILL REDUCE PROGRAM OPTIONS AND VARIETY  (5)

      VILLAGE CAN’T DO IT – NO EXPERTISE/INFRASTRUCTURE  (3)

              IT’S A MUNICIPAL FUNCTION  (2)             WHY ARE WE LISTENING TO SO FEW PEOPLE  (2)


Question 4:

WHAT QUESTIONS DO YOU NEED ANSWERED IN
ORDER TO MAKE AN INFORMED OPINION ABOUT THE
QUESTION OF REC GOVERNANCE?
104 respondents filled out information in this section. From this information, questions were sent
out to the following:

• Petitioners (Cindy Godin, Jeff Harton, Joyce Stannard, Bob Willey) – 5 questions
• Essex Junction Recreation & Parks – 9 questions
• Chittenden Central Supervisory Union – 5 questions
• Village of Essex Junction – 35 questions

QUESTIONS FOR THE PETITIONERS
QUESTIONS FOR THE PETITIONERS

GOVERNANCE

What do you think will be accomplished by achieving a transfer of governance?

A response has not yet been provided by the petitioners.

In your opinion, how will a transfer of governance benefit the community?


In your opinion, how will a transfer of governance enhance our recreation department?


In your opinion, what needs (please provide a list) are not being met by CCSU governance?


How will Village oversight address each of these needs?



QUESTIONS FOR ESSEX JUNCTION RECREATION AND PARKS

BUDGET
QUESTIONS FOR ESSEX JUNCTION RECREATION & PARKS

What is the EJRP budget?

For FY11, the EJRP budget is $1,529,988.
• $863,246 is from user fees (56%)
• $591,742 is from General Fund tax revenues (39%)
• $75,000 is from Capital Fund tax revenues (5%)

The EJRP tax rate has either declined or remained level for the past 5‐years.

Who manages the EJRP budget?

The EJRP budget and capital plan are developed and approved by the Prudential Committee and
voted on, as two separate items via Australian ballot, by voters of the Village of Essex Junction.
The budget is overseen by the CCSU Chief Financial Officer/Executive Director of Operations, and
implemented and managed by the EJRP Director.

Is the EJRP program self‐sustaining?

Nationally, on average, taxes support 60% of a recreation department’s total budget.  Only 44%
of EJRP’s budget is supported by tax dollars.  While most of the programs are considered “pay‐to‐
play,” tax revenue is needed to support the infrastructure of the department.

How much does EJRP contribute to the school district for managing the EJRP program?

EJRP has a $1.5 million budget, 300‐employees, and in one year processes nearly 1,200 accounts
payable, makes over 2,200 deposits, and serves 5,228 participants through 129‐different
programs.  In FY11, the Essex Junction School District charged EJRP $83,174 for providing fiscal
services (payroll, accounts payable, budget execution, bank deposits, financial reporting/auditing
support), treasurer services (payments and deposits), supervision, information technology
support, HR support, and consultation support in the areas of curriculum, special education, and
legal.


QUESTIONS FOR ESSEX JUNCTION RECREATION AND PARKS (continued)

GOVERNANCE

What is the current governance structure of EJRP? What type of oversight does EJRP staff
receive?


QUESTIONS FOR ESSEX JUNCTION RECREATION AND PARKS (continued)

What is the purpose of the Recreation Advisory Council?

From the Council’s Charter:
“The Essex Junction Recreation and Parks Advisory Council (Advisory Council) will serve in an
advisory capacity to the Department’s administrative staff in the development, maintenance,
and stewardship of a comprehensive system of leisure and recreational services as provided by
the Essex Junction Recreation and Parks Department (EJRP).”

Does EJRP report on a monthly, quarterly or annual basis? Does EJRP give a financial state of
the department report?

EJRP meets monthly with the Recreation Advisory Council and provides monthly updates to the
Prudential Committee.  Two to five times per year the EJRP director is requested to attend a
Prudential Committee meeting to deliver reports, answer questions, or present information.  An
annual report (both narrative and budget) is delivered to every home in Essex Junction.  The
CCSU Chief Financial Officer/Executive Director of Operations provides quarterly, year‐to‐date,
budget reports to the Prudential Committee.

PROGRAMS

Will program offerings remain the same if there is a transfer of governance?

Currently EJRP staff have the support to create and manage programs in order to meet the needs
of the community.  To date, the Village has not provided information indicating how programs
will be developed nor what programs would continue under Village governance.

Will program prices remain the same if there is a transfer of governance?

EJRP currently sets program prices based on our budget, vision, mission, and pricing policies.  To
date, the Village has not provided information about what the EJRP budget, vision, mission, or
pricing policies would be under Village governance.


QUESTIONS FOR CHITTENDEN CENTRAL SUPERVISORY UNION
BUDGET

What is the anticipated total savings to CCSU if the Supervisory Union no longer administered
EJRP?

In FY’11, EJSD directed the Rec Dept to contribute $78,174 toward the school district’s portion of
the CCSU assessment. An additional $5,000 was levied to contribute toward EJ Treasurer
expenses which aren’t part of the CCSU. The total CCSU assessment from all member school
districts was $2,688,295. This means the Rec Dept contributed 2.9% ($78,174÷$2,688,295)
toward the overall CCSU assessment. Logically, it would follow that the Rec Dept represents
approximately 2.9% of the CCSU workload.

It is unlikely that a 2.9% workload reduction would result in any salaried employee dropping
below the level of 40 hours per week. CCSU may be able to make a small reduction in the number
of hours for support staff and the estimated value would be about $10,000.

As an aside, the amount EJSD directs the Rec Dept to contribute for the CCSU assessment may be
lower in FY’12.

How much of that would be saved by Essex Junction School District?

The CCSU assessment to EJSD would have decreased by $25,357, but EJSD would not have been
able to collect the Rec Dept contribution of $78,174. The net effect would actually be an
increased cost of $52,817. These figures are explained in the paragraphs below.

Most of the CCSU assessment is based on the percentage of staff. If the Rec Dept was transferred
to the Village, the percentage would drop slightly for EJSD and increase for the other two school
districts (Westford and U#46).

The lower percentage, combined with the assumed CCSU savings of $10,000, would have resulted
in an assessment of $951,593 for EJSD. Since EJSD would not be able to receive a Rec Dept
contribution toward the assessment, EJSD would have paid the full $951,593. The actual EJSD
assessment was $976,950, but EJSD only paid $898,776 because of the Rec Dept contribution of
$78,714. So, while the CCSU assessment to EJSD would have decreased by $25,357 ($976,950 vs.
$951,593), the actual cost to EJSD would have increased by $52,817 ($898,776 vs. $951,593).

Additionally, the U#46 assessment would have increased by nearly $15,000 and an increase to
the U#46 budget impacts Essex Junction residents (for EJ students attending EHS). Therefore, the
cost to EJ taxpayers would be even higher than $52,817.


QUESTIONS FOR CHITTENDEN CENTRAL SUPERVISORY UNION (continued)

Given that there would be a decrease in the expenses and assessment, but now only four
groups sharing the expense of EJSD’s assessment, how would that affect the school tax rate for
EJSD?

For simplicity sake this response does not consider the U#46 implications. In FY’11, EJSD was
assessed $976,950 and received a contribution of $78,174 from the Rec Dept which nets at
$898,776.

Using the assumptions above, EJSD would have been assessed $951,593 and received no
contribution.

Therefore, EJSD would have paid an additional $52,817 ($951,593‐$898,776).

The resulting EJSD Grade K‐8 Homestead Tax Rate would have been $0.0570 instead of $0.0536 –
an increase of $0.0034.

What would be the anticipated effect on school taxes on an average family with a $250K
assessed property value, with no adjustment for income sensitivity?

Using the assumptions above, if the tax rate would have been $0.0034 higher, a family with
property valued at $250,000 would have paid an additional $8.50.

NOTE: This estimated impact only relates to school taxes. We do not know what the impact
would be to the Recreation Municipal tax rate if the department was governed by the Village.
Logically, if it costs more than $83,174 for the Village to support the Rec Dept, there would need
to be a tax increase to that rate as well. It should be noted that the Rec Dept would become the
largest department in the Village with a budget roughly equivalent to half of the entire
municipality as it currently exists.

EJRP also pays U46 for some services. If these services were no longer administered to EJRP,
would there be a savings to U46 or would these expenses still exist and need to be covered by
some other revenue source?

The Rec Dept has historically paid for some support from U#46 information technology (IT) and
maintenance personnel.

Since the IT support is based on the percentage of computers, the Rec Dept only paid U#46
$1,800.

Since this represents such a small body of work and since U#46 already anticipates the reduction
of one computer technician position in FY’12, there would be no additional savings to U#46.

The Rec Dept has had its own full‐time maintenance person for over a year now. As a result, the
need for U#46 maintenance support has declined dramatically and the Rec Dept cost to U#46
should also decrease in FY’12. There would be no significant savings to U#46.


50% of EJRP programs take place in the schools. Current District policy does not charge EJRP for
school use unless it is outside of normal custodial or security work hours. A governance change
would not affect this policy. If EJRP was no longer associated with the school district, and given
the current climate of school budget challenges, do you anticipate CCSU revisiting this policy,
whereby EJRP would be required to pay for facility use?

The decision to revise the Use of School Facilities policy resides with the CCSU Board which is
made up of representatives of the EJSD, U#46 and Westford School Boards.

If there was a change in building wear and tear or if there was a significant change in the type of
usage or frequency, administration may recommend that the board revisit the policy.

In this scenario, even if the policy does not change, the personnel costs would likely increase
since, as EJSD employees, some members of the Rec Dept staff are provided keys and access
codes which currently eliminates much of the need for security overtime hours.

GOVERNANCE

What are the key steps involved in transferring EJRP from school governance to Village
governance? What is a reasonable time frame to successfully accomplish each step?

The list below is clearly not all‐inclusive.
CCSU:
• Ensure an agreement is in place whereby the Village agrees to pay the long term debt
related to the bond for the pool and building renovation. One month – dependent on
approval by boards (Trustees and Prudential Committee).
• Cancel internet (T‐1 line), phone and copier contracts. One month.
• Cancel insurance coverage. One month.
• Employee terminations – cancelation of medical, dental and life insurance coverages. Up
to one month. (Note: three employees have contracts through 6/30/2012 which must be
honored.)
• Produce W‐2 Forms early – if requested by employees. One month.
• Transfer any fund balances – entire amount could be transferred if Village agrees to
assume accounts payable/receivable (if not, some residual amount may need to be held
to cover payables). One month.
• Determine whether or not to run certain programs such as after‐school care in the K‐5
schools – would need to know what programs would continue to be offered by the Rec
Dept and the conditions for use of school building. Time frame to be determined.



What are the key steps involved in transferring EJRP from school governance to Village
governance? What is a reasonable time frame to successfully accomplish each step?
(continued from previous page)

Village:
• Specific timelines need to be established by the Village.
• Establish staffing.
• Establish benefits (e.g., medical, dental, etc.).
• Load budget data (including salaries and benefits) into an Accounting and Personnel
System.
• System should allow for separate accounts for various programs.
• System must be capable of processing payroll for approximately 300 employees
throughout the year.
• System must be capable of processing over 1,000 invoices per year.
• System must be capable of processing over 2,000 cash receipts per year.
• Establish contracts for internet, phone and copier.
• Obtain insurance coverage.
• Determine which programs will continue to be offered – for programs residing in EJSD
schools, the Rec Dept would need to coordinate with the school district.

PROGRAMS

Are there any programs that are currently operated by EJRP that the school district would
continue running in the event of a transfer of governance (i.e. not transfer to the Village)?

This would be a Prudential Committee decision. Administration would need to know which
programs the Rec Dept is interested in continuing to offer and would need to consider factors
such as facility access and insurance coverage. Such would require a detailed understanding of
this new relationship. It is likely administration would recommend the continuation of after‐
school care at the K‐5 schools – either by the Rec Dept or by establishing a program internally.


QUESTIONS FOR THE VILLAGE OF ESSEX JUNCTION

BUDGET

The EJRP budget is voted on as a separate line item by the voters by Australian ballot in April.

How will the budget for the Recreation Department be voted on if there is a governance
change?

A response has not yet been provided by the Village.

All revenue realized by EJRP stays with EJRP. It cannot be accessed for any other purposes. Will
this remain the same under Village governance ‐ will EJRP be separate from the General Fund?


EJRP has a rolling capital fund that is voted on as a separate line item by the voters by
Australian ballot in April. Will EJRP continue to have a capital fund dedicated to recreation
purposes only? How will this be funded? At what level will this be funded? How will the capital
budget for the Recreation Department be voted on if there is a governance change?


If the Village were to oversee recreation, what are, if any, the anticipated increase in Village
costs for: Legal services? Audit services? Property & liability insurance? Workers compensation
insurance?


What will the tax implications for the Village property tax rate be of a governance change?
What would be the anticipated effect on Village taxes on an average family with a $250K
assessed property value?


EJRP currently has phone and internet connectivity through a T1 line connected to Essex High
School. How would EJRP connect to the phone and internet under a governance change and
how much would it cost per year?


EJRP currently has several cell phones. Who would the provider be under a governance
change?



QUESTIONS FOR THE VILLAGE OF ESSEX JUNCTION (continued)

GOVERNANCE

Under Village governance, will there be changes to the EJRP mission and vision?



How would a change in governance affect implementation of the EJRP 10‐year Master Plan?


In the event of a transfer of governance, how will the ownership of the buildings transfer?


How will the bond debt be transferred to the Village and/or how will the Village pay for the
remainder of the bond through 2019, if there is a change in governance?


If the Village were to govern EJRP, what accounting system will be used? Is this already in use
or will it need to be purchased? If so, at what expense?


For the Village, what are the key steps involved in transferring EJRP from school governance to
Village governance (HR, budget set‐up, phone, internet, vendor relations, bank accounts, hiring
new personnel, etc.)? What is a reasonable time frame to successfully accomplish each step?


What are the anticipated costs?


EJRP has over 525‐friends on Facebook and 90+ followers on Twitter. Will use of these types of
social media be permitted under Village oversight?


EJRP has it’s own website and domain name. Content is routinely updated and visitors have the
ability to comment on articles and programs. Will this domain name (www.ejrp.org) and type
of independent, interactive website continue to be permitted and promoted under Village
oversight?




Current EJRP structure includes a seven member volunteer advisory council that serves as the
liaison between the administration and the community. Under a governance change, would
this group remain in place in the same capacity? If not, then how would the Village provide for
community input?


At the request of the Prudential Committee, the Recreation Advisory Council has reached out
to the community with a survey and several public meetings to obtain more feedback as to the
residents’ desire for this change. What have the Trustees done to gather public input on this
subject?


Why are time and resources being spent exploring an issue raised by such a small but vocal
minority?


Why are the Trustees adamant that this be dealt with in such a short timeframe? Is there an
emergency?


If it ain’t broke why fix it? The school district has managed the recreation department for forty
years, why is a change needed at this time?


PROGRAMS

80% of EJRP program users are youth. Services that are currently accessed through CCSU
include support, guidance, meetings, and consultation with guidance counselors, principals,
athletic directors, and teachers. Under Village governance, how will the Village provide support
and expertise in reference to working with youth?


Currently the schools use EJRP parks and facilities at no charge. Will this change under Village
governance?




Are there any programs that are currently operated by EJRP that the Village would no longer
run in the event of a transfer of governance?


With a change in governance, would the Village revise existing fee structures for programs,
parks, facilities, and pools? If so, please explain.


STAFF

EJRP utilizes IT support from CCSU for purchasing, server maintenance and back‐ups, computer
security, software installation, network infrastructure, and more. If there was a change in
governance, what IT support will the Village provide? Who will provide it? Is there a cost for
these services?


EJRP utilizes maintenance support from CCSU. If there was a change in governance, what
support will the Village provide in terms of each of the following: plumbing (winterizing park,
installing/removing water meters, leaks, problems, etc.)?


Electrical (installing new electrical, addressing electrical issues, replacing parking lot/ball field
lights, etc.)? Auto repair (EJRP truck)? Equipment repair (tractors, lawn mowers, etc.)? Who will
pay for these services?


Does the Village adhere to a pay scale for full time staff? If so, please provide a copy. What is
the standard for determining pay rates and how would existing full‐time recreation employee’s
rates be calculated for the first year in the event of a governance change? How long are
employment contracts?


What benefits (health, dental, leave, tuition reimbursement, retirement match, life insurance,
travel and conference, etc. – please provide detail) would be offered to full time recreation
employees under Village governance? What are the costs to both the Village and the employee
for single, two‐person, and family healthcare and dental plans?




For employees at EJRP who have accrued benefits (achieved waiting period for retirement
match, accumulated unused sick, vacation, and personal time) how will these transfer to
Village employment under a governance transfer?


If the Village were to assume oversight of EJRP, who will provide accounting, finance, human
resource, and/or administrative support for EJRP’s operations? What will be the annual
expense? Will any additional staff need to be hired? If so, how many? In what capacities? At
what total compensation?


If the Village were running the recreation department and taking on that additional workload,
will there be in an increase in any existing Village staff salaries? If so, by how much?


Under Village governance, would there be any changes to the existing staffing structure,
personnel, titles, job descriptions, and/or work related responsibilities at EJRP? What
assurances are there that the existing recreation staff will become employed by the Village in
their current positions?


Several times, in reference to the Village staff workload, it has been said that they are at their
limit. In its current configuration and numbers, can the Village staff assume the additional
responsibilities of adding a new department?


Please provide a current organizational chart, demonstrating the relationships of Village
employees and departments. Please explain how recreation would fit into that chart, including
who would provide supervision and oversight of the department, and what that supervision
and oversight would entail.


Ejrp Governance Survey Results

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Semelhante a Ejrp Governance Survey Results

Semelhante a Ejrp Governance Survey Results (20)

Ejrp Governance Survey Results