Worcester officials discuss restoring Parks department leadership and separating it from DPW

Worcester public works and parks officials presented an informational briefing on the history and reasons for administratively separating the Parks Department from the Department of Public Works (DPW), and the Public Works Subcommittee voted to file the informational report.

Rob Antonelli, the city’s parks official, and DPW leaders described the administrative history: parks and DPW were consolidated during a past downturn to share administrative functions; over the subsequent decades parks continued to operate with distinct field operations and limited staff-sharing with streets or sanitation. Antonelli and DPW staff said the separation aims to give parks a direct seat in the city manager’s cabinet and to recognize increased public use of parks since the COVID-19 pandemic.

Antonelli said parks operations have about 67 employees across parks, forestry and cemetery functions (not counting golf), and argued that having an independent parks commissioner improves direct communication with the city manager and better highlights parks’ needs in capital planning. DPW Commissioner John Westerling and Assistant Commissioner Jared Connor said the split does not change the operational collaboration between parks, streets and sanitation; Connor said interdepartmental responses will continue when workloads or emergency responses require it.

Councilors asked for clarity on service lines and constituent contacts. Councilor Persillo asked for a simple list of the types of requests that should go to parks versus DPW; Antonelli and Connor agreed to provide a point-of-contact list for constituents and explained the parks department will hire two repurposed positions in its table of organization (a commissioner-level role and an administration-and-finance coordinator) as it formalizes the separation.

Why it matters: separating parks leadership from DPW changes how parks represent priorities to the manager’s office and could affect budgeting, staffing and constituent service pathways for park maintenance, forestry, cemetery upkeep and park programming.

Action: the subcommittee filed the informational report (voice vote). Members asked administration for a simple contact guide so councilors and residents know which department handles specific requests.

What to watch: hiring for the two repurposed positions and the department’s delivery of the promised contact-guide and a list of responsibilities for parks vs. DPW operations.