Public hearing held on proposed sale of Pullman Aquatic and Fitness Center to Schweitzer Engineering Labs; community voices split over encumbrance

The Pullman Public Schools board recessed into a public hearing on a proposed sale of the Pullman Aquatic and Fitness Center to Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories (SEL). No board action was taken at the hearing; the public hearing provided an opportunity for residents and stakeholders to speak for up to five minutes each.

Why it matters: The pool is a long‑used community asset used by schools, swim teams, senior exercisers and families. A private buyer offering upgrades could preserve swim access, but commenters raised concerns about legal encumbrances that may require the district to replace recreational capacity elsewhere and about the long‑term maintenance obligations created by any required replacement projects.

Support for SEL proposal Eric Newman, vice president at Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories, framed the offer as a community partnership: the Schweitzers donated funds to build the pool originally and SEL is proposing to purchase and update the facility so the community continues to have access. Newman said the sale would relieve the district and city of maintenance costs, make the facility taxable under private ownership and allow Pullman High School swim teams and community patrons continued use of an upgraded facility.

Concerns raised during the hearing Several residents supported preserving the pool through SEL’s offer, citing extensive community use including senior exercise groups and swim teams. Other speakers said the proposed transaction may come with an encumbrance obligating the district to spend any sales proceeds on replacing outdoor recreational capacity or creating new facilities — a requirement that could create new maintenance responsibilities and staff workload. Brandon Krueger, speaking as a resident, asked whether a long‑term lease might avoid encumbrance obligations while still preserving community access, and he warned of added projects and maintenance demands at a time when district staff already face tight workloads.

Process and next steps The board opened and then closed the public hearing; no vote was taken during the hearing. Board policy was read at the start of the hearing to explain procedures. The board will consider next steps consistent with its normal agenda process, which could include additional briefings or formal action at a future meeting.