A counterpoint to a new parks proposal
City Council President Lisa Rasmussen weighs in on a plan to split the parks department from the county
Mayor Diny earlier this month announced a surprising new proposal: Breaking up the city/county parks department and creating a new city parks department under the Public Works Department. Diny claimed it would save the city between $400,000 and $500,000.
The proposal blindsided council members, and many questioned the numbers, saying there hadn’t been enough analysis done to know whether or not it would actually save anything. Diny says it’s part of his zero-based budgeting plan, which starts from the assumption that all spending is unnecessary and needs to be justified in the next budget year.
The Wausonian reached out to Mayor Diny and to City Council President Lisa Rasmussen to make their cases. Yesterday we ran Diny’s case - today we’re running Rasmussen’s.
Rasmussen responds to Diny’s parks proposal
Recently, a plan emerged from the mayor’s office suggesting Wausau exit its contract with Marathon County to manage our park system, and place those functions under the DPW.
Information sent to one media outlet claimed between $400,000 and $500,000 could be saved by this. Wausau just approved a contract to outline work being done and clarify responsibilities and expectations of both parties as a guide for current and future leaders and staff. Thankfully, our Park and Rec committee chair placed the item on an agenda for open discussion. Members were curious about the stated potential savings. One asked for the basic calculations used to arrive at the savings figures. We were told there weren’t any, and no actual financial analysis had been done. The report he released was an organizational chart copied from the city budget and two bar graphs from the WI Policy Forum comparing park costs for other communities without detail on the number or type of facilities managed by them. Our response: Not so fast…show us the money.
Our Finance Director, with 30 years’ experience, told the committee she had not been asked to review the plan, and that there is “significant risk” to the city if changes are made without actual data and research to see the true costs (or savings) and impacts to services, facilities, staff and equipment. The Parks Director advised she was not asked for any information. Yet, she has job costing software to easily show what work is done and billed to the city under the contract. She implied assumptions were made instead of asking her for facts.
It reasonable to think if one is interested in a big change, you begin with the department heads who possess most of the data relevant to the discussion. Instead, information was handed off to one media outlet, unverified, and later defended with a claim that it was to “start a discussion” and inform the public in “real time”. Our mayor, instead of offering even basic math facts when asked about his idea, was critical of the committee for questioning and seeking better research. Afterward, he issued a press release complaining about being unable to ‘install a gumball machine at city hall without half the council decrying it as the end of civilization and seeking a study’. He accused us of rancor, hostility and the like. Readers, please watch the video online. Members were respectful but had questions. It is our job to make educated decisions and seek information to do it with. This change is way bigger than any gumball machine. The simplicity of that analogy reveals a lack of understanding of the actual work and the complexity of management and programming needed at these sites. Hastily rolling out documents that imply large savings, gets people excited only to find out, those numbers may not even be close to accurate is not fair to taxpayers looking for real relief.
The proper process for this would have been: 1. Idea is discussed internally by the mayor with his relevant dept heads, Parks, Finance, HR, and Public Works. 2. Staff would be asked to assemble preliminary data to determine if the idea is viable and manageable. 3. If determined to yield savings, a draft plan could be placed on the agendas of the appropriate committees for discussion. 4. Based on that, if additional study or information was needed, committees may authorize a study or request more info from staff. As the process moves along, timely media coverage would be happening to keep the public informed, using factual data. No one suggested that the council expects the mayor to carry his idea to all 11 council members individually as he has implied. We just want an organized process that begins with accurate facts and discussion with the affected departments before the plan debuts in the public and media. The way this was done, if the facts reveal this is not an effective plan, it again plays out in the community as a failure for local government.
Most concerning is that operation of our park system is about more than money. It’s about facilities and programming that enhance quality of life here. People expect them to be well run and available. DPW doesn’t have space to house the number of employees that would be added to the city workforce and their related equipment. The mayor toured the DPW facility with the council last month and saw the long-standing capacity issues there himself.
Parks represents about $3.5M of an annual budget that exceeds $100M. Below is a list from the 2024 budget document showing what we get for that money:
That is a LOT of facilities and time. In fact, it’s more parks than the department manages for Marathon County.
There was a time, over a decade ago, I and other council members wondered if we truly got 50% of the time and attention for city parks in exchange for our financial commitment. Back then, it was harder to quantify things and Wausau had less facilities. Today, the technology and quality facilities we’ve added are such that it is far easier to see and measure those metrics. I remain convinced that we are absolutely getting our money’s worth from the contract and that the cost sharing happening is accurately distributed.
I hope that if this plan is considered, real data is gathered and there is study of the impacts to city departments, facilities, workforce and taxpayers. Reveal all costs, including potential reductions in services and programming, impacts to user contract management and the like. Impacts to things like hiring, training and management of lifeguards, swim lessons, youth programs, collaborations with the schools and community groups. I’m also hopeful that rolling this out first to the media was not intended to create a wave of public excitement over how busy our new mayor is, only to blame the council if these unvetted plans don’t fly.
There’s a way for the mayor and the council to work well together. We learned in the council retreat that we want many of the same things. The council does not fear change and we all want to control costs. But, speaking to us through Op Ed’s and backing the council into a corner with snide public comments is not the way to build a productive relationship. We’ve all experienced times before where the council and mayor had a negative relationship, and no one wants to go back there. Good communication and proper process will go a long way to avoid that. Proper workflow is not about any of us quietly killing his ideas as was implied. It is about making informed, reasonable choices that help our city and avoiding hasty ones that can end as expensive mistakes.
The Wausonian is supported by readers like you. If you’re not subscribed, you can do so for free, and get The Weekly Wausonian and some other posts for free. Or consider a paid subscription to support local journalism and get all The Wausonian’s content.