City Council expects no more concession stand losses

Friday, March 13, 2020

The message has been sent loud and clear, and received as such: No more concession stand losses will be tolerated.

That was the message delivered Thursday night by Greencastle City Council members who questioned Park Director Rod Weinschenk at length on how renewal of a contract with Putnam County Comprehensive Services (PCCS) to operate the concession stand at Robe-Ann Park for 2020 fell by the wayside.

“All good intentions aside,” Councilman Cody Eckert said in summarizing the discussion, “the contract’s no longer there. Ultimately it could have saved us money, so now we’re looking at budgeting again, and I have no intention of budgeting for a loss.”

Council President Mark Hammer echoed that sentiment, adding “I don’t think any of us have that intention.”

Weinschenk said that message has been received.

“I understand your feelings and the direction you’re giving us,” Weinschenk told the Council. “The concession stand must break even or do a little better than that.”

He said he and the Park Board are putting together a plan to run the aquatic center concession stand themselves.

Last summer, Comprehensive Services clients operated the concession stand on a trial basis and ended up posting a small profit, something the city hadn’t done for a number of years.

All signs pointed to PCCS resuming that partnership this summer. But a couple months of delays resulted in the issue being tabled when Park Board President Tim Trigg was absent for one meeting and another found the board close to lack of a quorum when one member could only attend for the first 30 minutes. Then this month, PCCS Executive Director Andrew Ranck said the organization was no longer interested in continuing the program.

Weinschenk and Park Board member Cathy Merrell told the Council that Ranck’s decision caught them by surprise.

“The recommendation was to renew the contract with Comprehensive Services for this summer,” Weinschenk said.

He said that some Park Board members had questions about the contract, noting that “some items in the contract were not addressed or completed.”

“The contract stated,” Weinschenk said, “that they were going to use it as a training facility for their clients. Form our perspective, there were a couple people hired to assist the manager with the concession stand but we did not see a rotation of clients in there for training purposes.

“It was also stated that they were going to hire an intern but we saw the same two people in there all the time.”

He also said Ranck was supposed to give the board a detailed report on last summer’s undertaking.

“Did you, during the summer, ever notify PCCS of your concerns?” Councilman Adam Cohen asked.

“No, we did not,” Weinschenk said.

“Did you ever tell them they were delinquent in their report?” Cohen further asked.

“I did not,” Weinschenk answered.

However, Park Board member Merrell, who was in the City Hall audience, said she had contacted Ranck about a need for more information.

“I was anticipating something similar to what we’ve always gotten from the park,” Merrell said. “‘This is what we spent, this is where we did good, and this is where we did bad.’ That kind of itemization thing. But we never got it from Andrew.”

Nonetheless, Cohen said the important thing is that the concession stand operate in the black.

“I’m not interested in micromanaging who sells the potato chips,” he said. “The importance is for the concession stand running at least at break even or for profit. I really don’t care how that occurs.

“I accept that a pool could lose money,” added Cohen, whose day job is as men’s swim coach at DePauw University. “It’s a service we’re providing to the community. It’s a luxury. The concession stand, we’d like to see break even and could make some money.

“I really don’t care what they sell there,” the councilman continued. “I think I’ve been pretty consistent, I love the pool. I mean, I obviously love pools and support our community, but we’ve got tough decisions with the budget coming down the road.

“What I’m saying is, the concession stand should not be a money loser.”

Councilman Tyler Wade said he believes he was the first to bring up the issue when he saw the concession stand operating in the red in 2018.

“I was very happy,” Wade said, “that Comprehensive Services came forward last year to sort of do an experiment for that.”

Councilor Stacie Langdon, who is employed at Comprehensive Services, pointed out the positives in the PCCS arrangements, noting that a maintenance worker was hired to assist the park and that relationship has been renewed for 2020.

“I don’t think we should lose sight of the fact that PCCS showed us we can break even,” Langdon said, noting that the city can see that as a learning experience and move forward. “If we’re smart about it, was can hopefully break even and maybe possibly make a profit.”

First-year Councilman Eckert wanted to make Weinschenk aware of Council expectations in “crystal-clear” terms.

“I do think that partnering with PCCS was a priority,” Eckert said, “and many of us share that disappointment that we weren’t able to continue it.

“It doesn’t matter who ultimately staffs the concession stand,” Eckert continued, “the priority should be never letting a cost-savings contract slip through our fingers. I think that was probably the most disappointing thing.”

Weinschenk said he understands that.

“I will reiterate,” he said, “that my recommendation was to renew the contract and the Park Board was ready to do that.”

Park Board Vice President John Hennette said he knew there were some communication issues between the two sides, particularly with what the park staff wanted done in terms of maintenance and upkeep.

“When I spoke to Mr. Ranck, he said there was no problem waiting until the March meeting. He wasn’t upset and the board wasn’t upset. I don’t know where the thinking came from that we were trying to get rid of that partnership.”

Councilman Wade suggested that the Council, Mayor Bill Dory and the Park Board need to schedule a joint meeting to dissect the issues further and assure that all of the bodies are “on the same page.”

Comments
View 3 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • So the parties wanted to get a contract in place yet were unable to do so.

    Hmmmmmmmmm

    -- Posted by beg on Sat, Mar 14, 2020, at 12:02 AM
  • Reading between the lines, it seems the park director and the park board never embraced the contract with PCCS. Too bad, if that is true. For some reason (only the parties involved know for sure) what seemed like a win-win situation for the park board (ultimately the city) and PCCS fell apart. The public most likely will never know for sure what happened. Nonetheless, the city council has put the park director and the park board on notice. No more losses will be tolerated.

    -- Posted by rawinger on Sat, Mar 14, 2020, at 9:20 AM
  • Lots of reporting on this issue. Definitely one of the challenges facing disabled is finding environments outside the home that are accepting and understanding. Because it requires compassion and a certain amount of patience.

    -- Posted by Raker on Sat, Mar 14, 2020, at 12:00 PM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: