Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Aquatic Facilities topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Show Low council awards contract to replaster city pool, schedules Sept. closure

5577298 · August 6, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Show Low City Council unanimously approved a contract with Landmark Aquatic to replaster and repair the municipal pool, scheduling the work for the annual maintenance closure from Sept. 22 to Oct. 20 and approving an associated budget transfer.

The Show Low City Council unanimously approved a contract to replaster and repair the city’s aquatic center pool and authorized an associated budget transfer.

City staff member Mr. Austin told the council the fiscal year 2025–26 budget includes $225,000 for aquatic center capital improvements and that inspections during last year’s maintenance closure found areas where “the plaster in the pool was separating from the concrete.” He said staff confirmed the condition with the city’s pool repair contractor, Landmark Aquatic, and planned the work during the scheduled maintenance closure from Sept. 22 through Oct. 20 to avoid additional shutdowns.

The staff report said the project will also replace the existing grate in the slide water-supply sump at a cost of $9,650.27. Staff recommended awarding the work to Landmark Aquatic under City of Tempe contract T24-088-01 “in an amount not to exceed $239,000” and approving the related budget transfer.

Councilman Clark moved to award the contract; Councilman Adams seconded. The motion carried unanimously.

Council discussion included routine maintenance cadence (Councilman Jeff asked whether replastering is required about every five to seven years) and a council member’s remark that the city should begin setting aside funds toward eventual pool replacement. The council did not direct new study or design work at the meeting; the action was a contract award for the replastering and associated repairs only.

The motion as read in the meeting included a numerical figure that differs from the staff recommendation. The staff recommendation on record was “not to exceed $239,000”; the motion recorded in the meeting transcript quoted a different amount. The council vote approved the contract award as presented on the meeting agenda.