Red Cross Terminates Agreement with Swiminc: Our pools, the City, and Issue 19

Dear Worthington Public,

I feel obligated to share a few things with you, facts and events that I have learned about through inquiry in my role as a member of your City Council.  These issues relate to the conduct and credibility of Swiminc—and by extension, to the outdoor pools and the upcoming property tax levy Issue 19—and reveal things that I think you would want to know as an engaged citizen.

The full story is long and multi-layered, but the basic facts are simple and clear.  These are highlighted below, in condensed statements.  Following that, for those interested, is greater detail, context, and commentary.

Summary of Swiminc’s Conduct and Its Repercussions:

• The Red Cross has terminated Swiminc’s lifeguard Certification Agreement (as of Sept. 9, 2024), due to a performance audit that uncovered multiple, serious infractions (see #s 3-5 below).
• This past Spring, Swiminc’s Executive Director falsified Red Cross documents, signing his name as lifeguard Instructor for a course essential for lifeguard certification—when in fact he was out of town and had not taught the course (see #2 below).
• At the 7/15/24 City Council meeting, I asked Swiminc’s Board Vice President about the Red Cross audit, and he falsely claimed that the persons responsible for the audit were no longer a part of Swiminc, when in fact the Executive Director (cited above as falsifying documents) was and is still very much employed by Swiminc (see #s 1-2 below).
• Instead of dismissing those who had engaged in unethical behavior, Swiminc did the opposite, firing an employee who had refused to falsify the training documents when asked to do so by the Executive Director.  In response, a wrongful termination lawsuit has been filed against Swiminc.  See #s 2 and 9 below.
• Lack of transparency. See #s 2, 6 and 7 below.
• Questionable compensation practices. See # 8 below.

Extended Facts and Commentary regarding Swiminc, the pools, and the City:

As you may know, an entity called Swiminc has historically managed our outdoor public pools, and it is Swiminc’s $15 million design proposal that is the basis of the upcoming property tax levy vote (Issue 19).  Further, if the levy passes, the City plans to sign a twenty year lease with Swiminc, offered on a non-competitive basis, whereby Swiminc would continue to manage the outdoor pools.

There are some things about Swiminc and its leadership that I believe the public deserves to know, and that call into question the City’s current course of action.  I had hoped that the City—and by “City” I mean senior staff, notably our City Manager, and my colleagues on City Council, particularly those in leadership and on the pool task force—would have made inquiries of Swiminc and other relevant parties, and then provided their findings (including the information below) to the public prior to the levy vote.  But they have not, even when big red flags arose earlier this year.

So here, directly to you, are the facts and the reporting of issues that I believe the voting public would want to know.  I’ll be using position titles, and not names, because the issues presented here are of public, not personal, concern:

#1 — I learned last July that Swiminc was being audited by the Red Cross, which I knew could be very serious.  The Red Cross is the agency that certifies lifeguard training, thereby ensuring that our pools are safe for all users because our lifeguards are qualified and fully prepared. So at the 7/15/24 City Council meeting, I asked the Swiminc Board Vice President (who has been serving as spokesperson at City Council meetings) to explain why the audit was happening, and its status.  He said that Swiminc’s Red Cross accreditation “is not in jeopardy,” and that they were working through “discovered issues from past leadership that is no longer with the organization.”  This inquiry and testimony can be viewed here (you will need to look to the right side of this page, and go down to the 7/15/24 link), beginning at 1:55:00 (https://worthington.org/1885/Live-Recorded-Meetings).

#2 —These claims of his were not true.  Just the opposite.  Swiminc’s Red Cross accreditation was in fact in jeopardy and has now been revoked (see #3 below).  And it was not actions of past leadership that prompted the audit.  It was Swiminc’s current Executive Director who falsified documents, claiming that he had conducted lifeguard training for multiple students when in fact he had not.  He couldn’t have done the training—he was out of town that weekend.  But rather than redo the training properly, with a fully qualified instructor, he asked someone else at Swiminc to falsify the certification documents.  She refused. He then signed the documents, falsely claiming that he had done the training. The employee who had refused to falsely sign was subsequently fired (see #9 below).  To summarize: Swiminc’s Executive Director falsified documents related to lifeguard training, cited in the Red Cross audit, which the Board Vice President knew about, and yet publicly stated otherwise.  The Executive Director remains employed, while the person doing the right thing was fired.

#3 —As a result of the audit, the Red Cross, on September 9th, informed Swiminc, “Your Instructor Agreement is hereby terminated, and you are no longer permitted to teach any Red Cross course or hold yourself out as authorized to teach any such course.  Additionally, please note the students in these classes [that were part of the audit] no longer possess valid certifications.” [emphasis added]

#4 —Explaining the termination, the Red Cross representative identified multiple infractions related to lifeguard training:

• enrollment of underage students
• course times shortened below minimum requirements
• listing of students who did not attend but were claimed to have done so
• listing of instructors who did not actually teach the course.

#5 —This audit and resulting termination of the Instructor Agreement has serious repercussions.  This Red Cross Agreement is needed if Swiminc is to certify lifeguards, which will of course be necessary before next year’s outdoor swim season. It is possible that Swiminc could develop a new training plan and restore its relationship with the Red Cross—the Red Cross wants successful public pools and is likely to want to engage with Swiminc—and I would suggest that the credibility of Swiminc leadership needs to be re-established for this to succeed.

#6 —Notably, Swiminc has now known for over three weeks (as of this writing) about the termination of the Red Cross Instructor Agreement, but Swiminc has not informed the City or the public, even though we are now being asked to provide over $15 million in support of Swiminc’s plan and a proposed 20 year management of the pools.  This is consistent with Swiminc management’s conduct and general lack of transparency (see #s 7 and 8 below).  A healthy and publicly-minded service organization would come clean and chart a viable path forward based on fundamental reforms, beginning at the top.

#7 —I first became concerned about Swiminc’s lack of transparency earlier this year.  At that time, City Council was considering different design and funding options for the outdoor pools, so I asked Swiminc, through our City Manager, for information about Swiminc’s senior management compensation.  To me, this was a routine inquiry.  If the public is going to invest significant money in Swiminc, and enter into a long-term agreement with them involving the operations and finances of the pools, then salary levels are basic information.  What was Swiminc’s response?  They refused to provide City Council the information.  Instead, they offered several “reasons” for their lack of transparency, like the idea that they operate in a competitive industry.  Their response made no sense—it was full of deflections and irrelevancies—and their persistent lack of transparency about what should have been a routine matter was therefore a big red flag.  But the rest of Council and our City Manager did not seem to share my concerns.  And so the City proceeded without further inquiry into these issues, to this day, while nonetheless putting the Issue 19 tax levy on the November 5th ballot.

#8 —Since I first asked for this compensation information, my concerns about Swiminc’s compensation levels and practices have been validated.  The prior Executive Director (who is still employed at Swiminc but under the title Project Manager) has engaged in what I would call questionable activity related to his compensation.  In 2023, he received a base salary of $98,500, plus a $15,000 health insurance policy, but additionally charged Swiminc and the Ohio Dept. of Natural Resources consulting fees at $185/hour (the ODNR was the department managing the authorization and disbursement of $1 million in state capital funds previously awarded to Swiminc for purposes of redevelopment).  His total compensation is hard to determine with precision, given Swiminc’s unwillingness to provide the data, so I am not willing to state it.  But the way that the prior Executive Director’s fees were invoiced, and for what purposes, and with what knowledge of the Swiminc Board, and in what total amount, would all be worthy of inquiry.  I’ll leave it at that.  And a coda: when the add-on consulting fees started to become public knowledge, Swiminc management simply shifted gears, stopping the payment of separate consulting fees, while raising his base salary from $98,500 to $148,000/yr.

#9 —One final note for now, related to the Board Vice President’s claim that the persons responsible for the actions prompting the Red Cross audit were no longer with Swiminc.  Senior management at Swiminc has indeed been on something of a firing spree during this past swim season.  The Aquatics Manager, Director of Swimming Instruction, front office Manager, and three of five lifeguard supervisors, were all fired.  A fourth lifeguard supervisor also quit following the termination of her colleagues.  In one case, related to the falsifying of lifeguard certification documents by the Executive Director, a wrongful termination lawsuit has recently been filed against Swiminc. It should be noted that one effect of these firings is that there is not a single full-time year-round female employee remaining on the Swiminc payroll.

So that’s a summary report related to the current Swiminc leadership and management.  The City, as part of the information they are providing about Issue 19, states that Swiminc “has a successful history of running the outdoor pool in Worthington.”  This was true in an earlier era.  But not today.  And that’s the problem.  The City is now asking the public (via Issue 19) to fund a $15 million Swiminc plan for the outdoor pools that Swiminc will manage for twenty years, all without a competitive process.

There is a better way to ensure excellent outdoor public swimming in Worthington:

• The City assumes full and effective responsibility for the facilities, finances, and management of the outdoor pools.
• The City develops, in consultation with independent experts, a design/construction/financing/management plan wholly focused on the public good. 
• This process would be fully transparent,
  • based on a new review of all viable options,
  • with robust public engagement,
  • and a competitive bidding process for awarding the design & construction, as well as the ongoing third-party management.

Feedback and further questions are very welcome at: davidwrobinsonblog@gmail.com

A link to my earlier post on the vital importance of public swimming and my support of our public pools: https://davidrobinsonblog.com/2023/07/swimming-public-pools-social-infrastructure-and-public-health-and-what-my-mother-gave/