Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Aquatic Center topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board to debate scope and funding of proposed aquatic center as staff readies design options
Summary
District staff and board members used the work session to frame a forthcoming Monday discussion about the proposed indoor aquatic center and asked the board to clarify whether the project should be a modest community pool or a larger regional facility, and whether the priority is lowest initial cost or a fixed budget emphasizing value.
District staff and board members used the work session to frame a forthcoming Monday discussion about the proposed aquatic center (indoor pool). Staff said board guidance is needed on two framing questions: whether the district wants a conservative community pool (smaller, lower operating cost) or a larger regional facility designed to serve as an economic anchor, and whether the board prefers to prioritize the lowest up‑front cost or a fixed budget that emphasizes value.
Staff noted the district has an extensive record of prior feasibility, design and cost work and that estimates have varied over time. The original 18,000‑square‑foot concept had a historical budget estimate near $9 million, but subsequent reviews suggested that a comparable delivered facility could cost $12 million to $15 million. In response, staff said one option is to reduce scope and phase construction to keep costs nearer to earlier budgets.
Director Potter and other board members urged more rapid movement and stronger communication with the public about progress. Potter said members of the public expect the district to follow through on what voters previously authorized and suggested showing concrete steps—permits, test holes, soil samples and costed options—so taxpayers can see progress.
Board discussion covered funding pathways. Staff reminded board members that the aquatic center’s financing interacts with a fire sales tax (referred to in the meeting as “6A”), which is a priority item in the district strategic plan because that sales tax helps fund fire operations; the sales tax is scheduled to sunset in 2030 unless extended. Staff said pursuing an extension or replacement of that revenue could affect the district’s capacity to fund operations and capital projects. Board members discussed alternatives: reallocate existing savings, pursue a ballot measure, assess households, use TABOR‑related general funds, or rely on phased construction to reduce near‑term capital needs.
Design options were debated. Director Roberts and other members proposed exploring a simpler, off‑the‑shelf metal building that could house a pool at significantly lower cost and reduced operating expense than a large custom facility. Staff said the district already has an architect/consultant team working on design and can either continue with that team or adjust the scope; staff also said geotechnical testing quotes had been solicited and that updated bids were pending.
Staff will present a focused discussion item at the Monday meeting with the two framing questions and a summary of available design and cost options to help the board choose the next step. No construction contract or final budget was approved at the work session.
Ending: Staff will present concrete cost options and a recommended path forward on Monday, including geotechnical results and estimates for a smaller prefabricated building versus the larger phased model, and discuss funding options and timing with the board.
