Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Parks Audit topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Parks audit urges clearer maintenance standards as city faces loss of community‑service crews

Local Option Advisory · June 18, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A Baker Tilly audit recommended Salem formalize park maintenance standards, finish asset mapping and strengthen volunteer coordination; staff warned a county decision to end a community‑service crew program removed crews that provided 6–10 supplemental workers per day, creating an operational gap.

Veteran Bennett, community services director, told the Local Option Advisory on June 17 that an independent audit of the parks system by Baker Tilly praised staff commitment but identified several areas for improvement, including more specific maintenance standards, complete asset mapping and better volunteer coordination.

"They did appreciate the care and the commitment from staff," Bennett said, describing the audit as part of a broader, enterprise‑wide performance strategy. He said the review covered parks (not recreation services), was conducted between November and March and included peer benchmarking with other cities, which produced useful but imperfect comparisons.

The audit recommended formalizing a written maintenance schedule that specifies tasks and frequency — for example, mowing cadence by park type or restroom cleaning frequency — so staff and the public have clear expectations. "We're gonna be tightening up the precision of the maintenance standards," Bennett said, adding that standards must reflect Salem's actual staff capacity.

Jennifer Keller, parks and recreation manager, told the committee the audit also flagged supplemental labor and volunteer tracking as material to operations. Keller said the city has relied on a mix of seasonal workers, volunteers and contracted crews. She said Marion County recently notified the city it was abolishing a county program that supplied community‑service crews, removing what had been "6 to 10 staff per day" who supported parks work.

"At this point, they're saying permanently through Marion County because they cannot support that program through the county," Keller said, describing the loss of crews as "a large impact to parks." She said the program once supplied up to 60 supplemental workers at peak capacity when multiple crews were available, but in recent years the city had been down to a single crew; that has now ended.

Staff described the limits of contracting as an alternative: past analyses found private contractor costs higher than seasonal staff, and contractors typically cannot cover the full scope of seasonal roles (events, restroom closures and night/weekend shifts). Keller cited a current private contract rate of $1,600 per day for limited work but said that alone would not replace seasonals.

The audit also urged completion of an asset‑management database so the city can map capital and maintenance needs and incorporate ongoing maintenance costs into planning and capital‑improvement decisions. Bennett said the parks team will continue that work and develop outcome‑based performance indicators to measure whether resources achieve desired community outcomes.

Bennett said the audit recommended removing a fee that had discouraged community‑service workers from participating; that change has already been implemented. "The fee schedule, which is set to take effect July 1, already eliminates that fee," he said, adding the city expects that change to reduce barriers to supplemental crews and volunteers.

Next steps include tightening maintenance standards, finishing asset mapping, pursuing alternative supplemental labor sources (including private vendors or other jurisdictional programs) and developing clearer performance measures. The committee did not take a formal vote on policy changes at the meeting; staff said they will return with follow‑up reporting and plans to implement the audit recommendations.

The advisory closed the audit discussion by thanking staff and inviting further questions; the committee will receive the completed audit findings and responses in a later meeting cycle.