Home | 


Approved Aug 24, 2005 - Parks and Recreation Minutes


Wednesday, August 24, 2005, 5:30 p.m.
Administrative Complex Board Meeting Room

The August meeting of the Santa Rosa County Parks and Recreation Committee was held at the Administrative Complex beginning at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, August 24, 2005. The following members were present representing the sports associations and host organizations: David Radcliffe, Tiger Point Recreational Park; Larry Dixon and Darrin Nicely, Navarre Youth Sports Association, Navarre Sports Complex/Navarre Football-Soccer Park/Holley Ball Field; Dan Millham, Futbol Club of Santa Rosa, Inc., Santa Rosa Soccer Park, and Charles Baxley, Pace Athletic and Recreation Association, Pace Athletic and Recreational Park/Santa Rosa SportsPlex.

Absent were representatives from East Milton Recreational Park, Chumuckla Community Center and Park, Fidelis Community Center and Park, Benny Russell Park, and Swenson Park.

Also present were the Administrative Services/Parks Operations Manager, Tammy Simmons; County Administrator, Hunter Walker, and County Attorney, Thomas V. Dannheisser.

The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m.

The Administrative Services Manager welcomed all.

Minutes from the June 22, 2005, meeting was accepted as written.        

The topic of discussion was the draft volunteer program and draft code of ethics. The concerns the Board of County Commissioners had expressed at the August 22, 2005 Committee-of-the-Whole were at what level would the background checks be preformed and who would maintain the records: county or association, the Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act, the cost for the background checks for the entire park system, and for Attorney Dannheisser to review the felony list and approve. The draft policies were provided in the agenda package and discussion took place based on these documents.

The first item to be discussed was at what level, the county or the organization, will the background checks be performed and who will be responsible for keeping the original volunteer application. Discussion took place on this subject and the decision was made to have the county perform the background checks, get the results from the contracted company, and to house the application and responses. The only information that the county should have to file is the original application with the signature release and the response from the contracted company.

Dannheisser questioned what information was on the volunteer application. The volunteer application was provided to Dannheisser.

Discussion took place on the proposed system, red (negative report), yellow (further review required), green (no offenses as stated in policy approved by county) versus red and green. The committee’s preference is that the company responses would only be red, yellow, or green, the raw data would be obtained at the contracted company level. Should the response be yellow, the policy would have to state what information would be needed for the committee or responsible individuals to take a closer look at the offense to determine if the volunteer would be allowed to participate in the sports program. After much discussion the committee agreed to red and green system. If an individual get a negative response, the contracted company will be required to send the results to both the county and the individual. The individual can at this point appeal the decision.

Dannheisser questioned the process if a volunteer background check response from vendor was negative, would the applicant have the right to follow up on the response. Nicely stated this is where the Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act comes into play. The process that the committee placed in the draft background check policy allows for an applicant to appeal a denial to volunteer. The bottom line is that the applicant gets to check and make sure the records are right and the opportunity to appeal the results. Nicely stated that if an applicant gets a negative response from the contracted company we would provide them with the agency name, address, phone number, web site information, etc. It is the responsibility of the applicant to follow through and make sure that their report is corrected if it is erroneous. 

Discussion took place on the social security number being required for the background checks. Dannheisser requested that we utilized truncated social security number, utilizing the last four digits. Nicely stated that a couple of the companies that he had spoken to said that they could perform the background checks based on the last four digits.

Simmons stated that she had received several calls from background check companies and they are requesting that the county go out for proposals on this service. The committee decided that the county would go out for proposals on this service. Also decided was that the background checks would be done on the county level, this will allow the county to know that the checks are being done. Dannheisser stated that the association would get the volunteer to fill out the form and then send to the county for the background check input and storage of documents.

Millham questioned the background checks that they are doing through the AYSO, would they be waived from the county approved policy. Simmons stated that the policy addresses this, and an organization can be waived provided their background checks follow the approved policy. Walker stated that the county would be willing to issue a waiver, if the organization is already doing background checks. Millham stated he would contact the state and get the criteria they use and submit to the county. Simmons requested that Millham and Nicely check with FYSA and AYSO and see if they will allow the association to provide a copy of results and the background check to them, and they provide a waiver to the organization.

Dannheisser requested that the organizations provide the number of volunteers to be checked; this could be put in the proposal, which could affect the cost per background check. This information was also requested by the Board of County Commissioners, so that they can determine the cost to the county for the 100% background check.

The committee requested that Dannheisser prepare the proposal for companies to perform background checks and review the Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act and create a policy for negative responses. The committee requested that Dannheisser establish a policy for the Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act and the county to do the process. The proposal would include for a background check in all 50 states including sexual offender checks. The proposal would include an option for the company to do the background check and the Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act compliance process.

Radcliffe requested that we change 1.l. under program outline in the Volunteer Policy to say Team Mom/Dad, rather than Team Parent. The committee agreed to this change. Using the words team parent could be interpreted as all team parents.

The goal of the committee is to take this item back to the County Commission the first meeting in October.

The item to be taken up at the next meeting will be to review the proposal as provided by Dannheisser and the Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act compliance process, which is scheduled for Wednesday, September 28, 2005, at 5:30 p.m., at the Santa Rosa County Administrative Complex Board meeting room.

The meeting adjourned at 6:25 p.m.