BELFAST — The city manager, in his Dec. 18 report, said he expects to be advertising soon for the vacant park director's position.

The move would be standard procedure were it not for the three months it took to get there, a period of time during which the volunteer Parks and Recreation Commission set aside its grand ambitions and went into survival mode — with some members wondering to what degree the department would even continue to exist.

The story mostly unfolded between the lines of public discourse, and arguably started last winter when City Manager Joe Slocum began keeping track of the responsibilities of then-Parks and Recreation Director Jim Bell.

Speaking in early December, Slocum said he did this in order to know if the director's was a full-time job during the winter months or if — like the cemetery director, who helps the public works department in the off-season — the parks director could split time part of the year.

Slocum has been creative in finding cost-cutting ideas during his five-year tenure as city manager, but members of the Commission saw the attention to Bell's work as something akin to dogging the department head, and ultimately connected to Bell's resignation, tendered Oct. 10 after a roughly three-week absence that, according to public documents and interviews with sources at City Hall, was due to his dismissal and subsequent unsuccessful appeal of the decision.

At a November meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission, Commission member Robert Gordon described Bell as "full of energy" when he was hired. He credited the former director with starting a number of programs, which are now taken for granted, but said during the last couple years things became stagnant.

"If you're constantly belittled and chastised it's hard to do your job," said Commission Chairwoman Carol Good.

After Bell's resignation became public, Slocum cited the increase in taxes in the past year and said he wanted to review the operations of the department. He planned to do this with all city departments, he said. With Parks and Recreation, he said, maintenance of the parks and facilities should be the first priority.

"I don't want the city organizing a horseshoe tournament when the tables in Heritage Park are broken," he said.

When it's not shorthanded as "Parks and Rec," the word "Parks" alone is usually enough to signify the department that takes care of a town's grassy spaces (and amenities like tables) and some of the events held there (like horseshoe tournaments). But in practice Belfast's Parks and Recreation Department has been mostly "parks" with a little "recreation."

The Commission has been trying to shift that balance, at least since Bell was hired in 2004, in order to offer more free, organized recreational activities to residents. This has happened to a certain degree, but Commission members said their efforts have often been met with resistance or apathy. Programming has long been the province of the Waldo County YMCA and the school district, and expanded city programming was viewed as unnecessary or competitive.

Slocum said his hesitation after Bell resigned was based on what he saw as two conflicting ideas: a desire to keep the tax rate low and the  Commission's interest in expanding the city's recreational programming.

"Parks is not like the police department or the fire department. It's the only department that needs another department to fulfill its mission every single day," he said, referring to the relationship between the Parks and Public Works departments. "While I was looking at that, the Parks Commission said, 'we're looking at expanding,' so I said, 'Ok, talk to the Council.' I'm not going to hire someone not knowing which direction we're going."

Initially, however, Slocum's statements were less clear and he appeared to act on the parks question only when prodded by members of the Council. Commission members worried that the manager was building a case to minimize the Parks and Recreation department and possibly redistribute the oversight of the city's parks to other departments and non-city entities.

"It's really not that diabolical," Slocum said when asked about his decision to delay the search for a new director. "This year I'm looking at every department. I'm looking at: Is there anything we need to change before we put it back the way it was? You don't fill a vacant position without knowing if it's going to expand or contract, and we're going to do that with other departments."

The unusual structure of the Parks and Recreation Department adds a layer of complexity to the debate.

The city formed the Parks and Recreation Commission in 1906 to oversee City Park, which had just opened. The volunteer group continued to manage a small number of parks until 2004, when Bell was hired as the first Parks and Recreation director. This coincided with a major expansion in the city's park land over the next few years, much of it coming from MBNA's conversion of several downtown industrial properties into parks, including Belfast Common and Steamboat Landing. 

The fact that the  Commission preceded the director led to a perception that the Commission was more powerful than the director it was supposed to be advising. In 2008, the Parks and Recreation and Public Works departments were merged with both department heads retained, further confusing the hierarchy. 

In 2009, the city overhauled the "tot lot" at City Park into a playground that was more expansive but required more maintenance, and revived the former ski area on City Point Road. Last year the ice skating rink was added behind Waterfall Arts, adding to the roster of city parks holdings.

Members of the Commission said Bell was fielding more calls from outside organizations wanting to use city parks, which have grown in number since 2004 from five to 17. Thus for most members, the idea of not filling the vacant position has seemed absurd.

Good and Commission member Cathy Gleeson met privately with Slocum and Public Works Director Bob Richards on Oct. 23. Notes taken by the city manager at the meeting show a clarification of the respective, and divergent, views. The tone at a subsequent meeting of the Commission, however, showed it did little to assuage the fears of Commission members.

"I feel the urge to defend the position," said Good at a Nov. 8 meeting, as the Commission prepared to make its case to the City Council in an upcoming workshop.

It had been several years since the Commission had a workshop with the Council, and Good thought it important to make a clear and direct argument for a new director. No informational presentation about the different parks or activities. Only the request and supporting evidence.

But the resistance the Commission had seen from the city manager wasn't there among the city councilors.

Speaking Dec. 17, Commission member Gordon said it was at that meeting with the Council — a Dec. 5 workshop attended by three city councilors, members of the Parks and Recreation Commission, the public works director and the city manager — that the tide turned. After listening to Good and Slocum give their respective views, Councilor Mike Hurley asked, in effect, why the conversation was even happening.

"I haven't heard, so far, any discussion [among city councilors] of not having a parks director," he said. "If there's any interest in disposing of that position, I haven't heard it yet and frankly that would be a good [topic] to get rid of and let's get moving. I just haven't heard that idea put forward.

Hurley said he felt like he was watching "a very well-mannered argument" between the city manager and the Parks and Recreation Commission.

"I feel, Joe, that you're taking a very strong policy position that, when I talk to other councilors, I get absolutely no feeling from them that they don't want a full time parks director and I think that's really an important starting place," said Hurley

If there were specific issues with the acting director or that person's use of time, those could be addressed separately, he said.

"I think after that meeting and Mike saying that, I think the Council was headed in that direction [of hiring a new director], so it was a matter of changing little things here and there," said Gordon.

The Commission met once more with Slocum to finish a revised job description for the new director and also to draft an amendment to the City Charter that would define the parks director position, where currently only the Commission's role is defined.

"It went smoothly," Gordon said. "We were in about an hour discussing it [among Parks Commission members], then Joe was in for 15 minutes and that was the end of it."

In his Dec. 18 manager's report to the City Council, Slocum recommended the change to the Charter and said he expects to advertise for a new Parks and Recreation director shortly after Christmas.

For more information on this article, contact news@penbaypilot.com.