Weston parks committee agrees to explore joint pool partnership with Rothschild and Schofield

The Weston Parks Committee on a recorded voice vote agreed to explore a possible joint venture with the Rothschild‑Schofield Aquatic Center to share aquatic services and study options for a smaller, age‑targeted pool in Kennedy Park. The committee’s motion directs staff to “explore further and report back on the next steps.”

The item was introduced by Ryan Vanwall, administrator for the Village of Rothschild, who presented four‑year operating figures for the Rothschild and Schofield facilities and urged cooperative planning. “The village of Rothschild on average is losing just over $93,000 a year at the pool facility, and Schofield is taking a deficit of about $46,000 a year,” Vanwall said. He added that an outlier splash pad installation affected averages; excluding that outlier, Rothschild’s average annual loss is $81,032 and Schofield’s $40,005.16.

Nut graf: The committee’s vote opens a staff‑led exploratory process aimed at avoiding abrupt closure of the Rothschild‑Schofield Aquatic Center and evaluating whether shared operations or a new, smaller “kiddie” pool in Kennedy Park would better serve families while limiting municipal subsidy.

Committee members and residents raised cost and equity concerns. Vanwall said Rothschild expects to lose a major revenue stream when a nearby power plant is decommissioned in 2031 or 2032; he said the village currently receives about $1.3 million a year from that plant. He also reported near‑term capital needs at the Rothschild‑Schofield pool: initial contractor estimates put concrete repair alone at roughly $550,000–$600,000.

Discussion covered several possible approaches: continue sharing existing pools; create a tri‑community maintenance agreement with annual cost‑sharing; or build a smaller 4,000–5,000‑square‑foot, shallow pool (1–2 foot depth) in Kennedy Park targeted at younger children, with separate filtration to avoid closing multiple pools for contamination. Vanwall noted the build‑out timing and cost estimates are conceptual only and would require follow‑up engineering and financing work.

Public commenters and some committee members emphasized the amenity value of the Rothschild‑Schofield pool for younger families, while others urged caution about additional costs to Weston taxpayers. A resident who declined to give a full name but provided an address said she opposed adding a new pool without voter approval: “A 5,000‑square‑foot pool that we’re going to run…and we’ve already been losing money — no.”

Action and next steps: The committee approved this motion: “The park and rec committee is interested in exploring partnership options with Schofield and Rothschild Aquatic Center Commission, and staff should explore further and report back on the next steps.” Motion by Katrina; second by Clark. Members voted unanimously in favor. Staff said they would include additional financial detail and return monthly updates to the committee.

The meeting record shows no commitment to construction, bond issuance, fees, or a timeline beyond directing staff to study options and report back; any formal intergovernmental agreement or building project would require later committee and board approval.

Ending: Staff indicated cost estimates, operational impacts, and potential contract language would be developed for future meetings so committee members could evaluate budget impacts and resident outreach before any final decision.