The $15 million new outdoor pool project is the biggest project the city has had in recent history (at least since the rec center 20 years ago). Typically, public projects and third-party programs are publicly bid (required by state law) so there is fair competition in the selection process.
City Council in September approved a resolution to hire SwimInc as the third-party manager of the outdoor pool without any public bid. This comes as part of a SwimInc plan to use a property tax increase to pay for a new pool and manage the operations.
Granted, SwimInc has been operating the pools for 70 years. But there was never a plan to set aside money for pool upgrades. Also, in recent years, there have been questions about SwimInc’s organizational practices.
SwimInc used a $1 million state grant to double pay its executive director as a consultant (nearly $200k). And, they used the money hire a consultant to push forward the concept of building a new pool.
Even this year, when asked at a council meeting to share compensation information, they refused - citing the information needs to be hidden from the public to maintain a competitive edge in hiring talent. However, nearly all similar pools in the area are owned by public entities. This means I can call any public entity and find out what their employee compensation is. This information should be public, especially when asking the public for money.
The agreement provides a tiered membership structure, where residents will pay less than school district residents, and non-residents will pay more. There is no guarantee the memberships will be less expensive than they are today. Likely they will be more expensive.
The SwimInc board did not fully discuss options prior to hiring the consultant and they did not discuss the options the consultant presented to them. The board was given the report (the report that contains the $15 million new pool) shortly before they had to vote on it; to comply with the state requirements for spending the $1 million grant.
The $15 million new pool plan provides a smaller pool for kids. Yes, it includes a zero-entry feature, but it reduces the pool by more than 300 sqft. The bigger pool (according the consultant) will be for competitions, and will be at least 4-ft deep throughout the entire pool.
Proponents of the levy might argue the final design hasn't been approved. But that's one of my points. No design was ever started, let alone discussed meaningfully by SwimInc or by council.
The city's pool task force (Bonnie Michael, Rebecca Hermann, me) never seriously considered alternatives. Rebecca Hermann was pushing for a tax levy from day one of the task force…even when the consultants offered to us that we could keep the pool operational for decades with a $4 million investment.
Rachael Dorothy, who is now Council President, was in a leadership position on the SwimInc board from early 2021 until June 2023 – the same time frame as the push for a new pool paid for with a property tax increase.
To summarize, an organization is pushing for a larger competitive pool and smaller kid’s pool. They used state grant money to double-dip the director’s salary and hired a consultant at the last minute to develop a $15 million new pool concept. They handed the plan to the city and got council to promote a property tax increase to pay for it. The new building and management plan are being awarded to them without a competitive process. And the person leading council meetings was on their board leadership.
Comments