Council members and staff spent a substantial portion of the finance meeting reviewing the municipal pool’s operating shortfall and options to reduce the subsidy. Committee members and staff discussed a suspected leak, a decades‑old filtration system that staff estimated would cost about $24,000–$25,000 to replace, declining receipts from admissions and concessions, and possible changes such as raising admission prices, increasing pool‑party rental fees and boosting advertising.

The conversation matters because the pool is subsidized in part by a local income‑tax allocation and the council must decide whether to increase revenues, reduce service levels or allocate additional general funds. Committee members repeatedly emphasized the pool’s role in recreation while noting it does not operate at a profit.

Committee discussion and evidence
Members noted that 3 percent of the village income tax is allocated to the pool fund. Participants said admission had not been raised since February 2019 and that regular admission was currently $7 (with three‑and‑under pricing frequently used). Council members and staff discussed that poor weather, school scheduling changes and early school closures depressed attendance this season. Staff reported the pool has multiple days with very low patron counts while lifeguard staffing rules require minimum numbers on site; that combination raises personnel costs on slow days. The concession stand frequently ordered and discarded prepared food after rains, increasing waste and reducing net receipts.

To increase revenue, council members and staff discussed modest admission increases, raising pool‑party rental charges (one suggestion was $250; another council member suggested $300), advertising more pool parties, and experimenting with concession operations and pricing. Council members asked staff to compare rates at nearby pools (Pleasantville and Tiki were cited as local comparisons) and to return with proposals. Committee members also discussed whether closing the pool earlier in the season (for example, immediately after school) would materially reduce the operating deficit; staff said they would calculate wages and operating cost savings from scaling back hours.

Infrastructure and near‑term maintenance
Staff reported a suspected leak and said leak‑testing would be performed (village staff scheduled leak testing). The filtration system was described as “way old,” and staff gave an estimated replacement price in the mid‑$20,000 range; at least one speaker said replacement might be able to be deferred one year if temporary repairs were feasible. The committee also heard that the pool’s filter had been ‘‘bandaged’’ in past seasons and that a full replacement would likely be a multi‑thousand‑dollar expenditure.

Decisions, directions and next steps
The finance committee approved the monthly financial reports earlier in the meeting. On pool‑specific follow‑ups, council members directed staff to: run leak tests, prepare a cost comparison for filter replacement versus temporary repairs, model the pool’s revenue and expense outcomes under different admission and party‑rental rates, and compare regional admission/party pricing. Staff reported they would meet (several times were proposed in discussion) to prepare a line‑by‑line review and return recommendations to council. No formal vote on pool closures, rate increases or filter replacement occurred at the meeting.

What happens next
Staff will perform leak testing, complete a financial analysis on attendance, personnel and concessions, and return to the council with recommended rate and operating changes. If the leak or filter replacement costs are higher than the fund can absorb, the council will face a near‑term choice about whether to increase revenues, reduce operating hours or use other village funds to bridge the shortfall.