Some grow uneasy with city, YMCA management deal

WASHINGTON — Tensions seem to be ratcheting up between the city of Washington and its YMCA over a 2021 agreement that establishes duties for management of the Wellness Park.

The agreement requires the city to pay $40,000 a year to the Y, split over two installments due by Sept. 1 and Dec. 1. One of those payments was listed on the Washington City Council’s consent agenda Tuesday night — at a meeting chaired by acting Mayor Pro Tem Illa Earnest, with Millie Youngquist out of town — but was pulled for separate consideration by Council Member Fran Stigers.

“I’m just wondering why, when you look at the finances for the park, we’re paying for all the ball field supplies in that part of recreational services,” he said.

It was not the first time butting heads with the Y for Stigers, who previously criticized the organization during 2019 budget talks, recent pool agreement negotiations, and initial drafting of the Wellness Park deal discussed Tuesday night.

YMCA of Washington County CEO Amy Schulte said she was confused by the question, and that the agreement stuck to terms spelled out when it was signed.

"It clearly outlines who pays which expenses,“ she said. ”The $20,000 that is on your agenda for consideration tonight is a management fee that is paid for us … coordinating schedules, coordinating events, (and) making sure everything is stocked and supplied, making sure the trash is cleaned up afterward, cleaning up the park afterward and making sure all of the entities have what they need.“

The separated motion to approve the $20,000 payment was moments away from dying for lack of a second, until Earnest’s declaration of a failed motion was interrupted by a second from Council Member Ivan Rangel. The item then passed on a 4-1 vote, with Stigers still voting against it.

Such a narrow passage is unusual for a consent agenda item. The list of routine procedures are typically grouped as one agenda item for bulk approval under the assumption that they’ll be uncontroversial.

Council members have been known to set aside specific consent items for separate consideration in the past, whether due to clarifications, grudges or any number of other reasons.

At the same meeting Tuesday night, Council Member Bethany Glinsmann requested a stand-alone vote for traffic camera expenses she had a question about. Notoriously, former Council Member Steve Gault voted against every consent agenda item relating to the Wellness Park during the tenure of former City Administrator Brent Hinson, following a disagreement between the two over a proposed pond for the area.

A consent agenda item failing altogether is quite rare.

While Tuesday night’s item ultimately passed, Schulte said she was taken aback by the close call during a public comment portion of the meeting.

“It gives me a lot of concern that we’re operating in good faith on our part, doing what is accepted as best under the management agreement, if we’re going to get to a point where we’re not going to know whether we can expect payment,” she said. “I would just like to go on-record to say that, this concerns me greatly and I will make sure that we talk about it within our organization … I think that it should be concerning to you as well.”

After the meeting, the city and the Y provided identical copies of the agreement to The Union. The document gives both sides two ways to terminate their partnership; the first involves one party informing the other in writing of plans to break from the terms no later than Oct. 31 of a given year. The other involves one party breaking away if the other fails to meet its obligations or correct such a failure within 14 days of a written notice.

Comments: Kalen.McCain@southeastiowaunion.com