Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Aquatic Center topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Baldwin County commissioners table aquatic center SOPs amid delays, staffing and equipment concerns
Summary
Commissioners voted to table standard operating procedures for the new Baldwin County aquatic center after staff and commissioners raised concerns about construction delays, lifeguard recruitment, concession planning and timing for a grand opening.
Get email alerts on the Aquatic Center topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Baldwin County commissioners on Thursday voted to table the proposed standard operating procedures (SOPs) for the county's new aquatic center after a lengthy discussion about construction delays, staffing and vendor options and whether the facility should open this year.
The item drew questions about the source document, staffing pay and minimum-age rules for chaperones, as well as practical issues such as when a commercial slide will arrive and how to recruit lifeguards. Carlos, a county staff member presenting the item, said, "we have the standard operating procedures prepared they've been prepared for 11 months now. These are from the Southern Pines Waterpark." The board voted to table the SOPs to allow further review.
Why it matters: Commissioners described the aquatic center as a high-profile, costly project for Baldwin County and said any opening that is not carefully staged could create public-relations problems. The board also flagged operational details that will affect costs and safety: lifeguard recruitment, concession planning, entry limits, chaperone ages and whether to contract out operations or maintenance.
Carlos, the staff presenter, said the SOPs were adapted from another waterpark, edited by county staff and distributed to the recreation staff for review. Commissioners noted the document includes placeholders and language that must be customized (for example, references to "Millersville City, Lawrence County School District") and flagged several specific edits.
Several commissioners questioned line items that set wage ranges or referenced federal minimums. One speaker asked whether pay information should be placed in a county pay schedule rather than in the SOP. Commissioners also discussed a discrepancy noted in the draft about chaperone age; the draft allows a 16-year-old to act as a guardian for a group in some circumstances, and multiple speakers said that should be changed to 18 or otherwise clarified depending on group size.
Commissioners and staff discussed multiple operational questions that influenced the decision to table the SOPs: ongoing rain has delayed construction (workers were scheduled to place rock for the pickleball courts but were delayed two days due to rain), the splash pad work has not started because of wet soil, and the park's commercial slide is not expected to arrive until August with a minimum three-week installation. One commissioner said, "If I had to vote today, I'd say we don't open this year," citing the slide schedule and staffing timelines.
The board discussed options to reduce county staffing burdens, including contracting out some or all operations. Carlos said he had asked Pemlico Pools for a maintenance proposal, and commissioners discussed exploring companies that could provide lifeguards or operate the facility for the first season. Commissioners referenced outreach to the "Mid Georgia Consortia" (a regional workforce contact) to assist with lifeguard recruiting.
The board requested that recreation staff and commissioners review the SOP line-by-line and return a revised draft. Commissioners also agreed to a site visit: David Freeman, the county engineer, will coordinate a walkthrough; the commission tentatively scheduled a site visit for Thursday at 9 a.m. to review progress and outstanding items.
The formal motion to table the SOPs was made during the meeting and approved by the board; the meeting record indicates the motion passed and was recorded as unanimous. The board directed staff to collect revised procedures, check other parks' updated practices and bring a new draft back to the recreation committee and then to the full board for a future vote.
The meeting also included routine procedural motions to return to and adjourn from regular session.
