Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks Pool Operations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parks board discusses pool staffing, costs and lifeguard recruitment ahead of summer
Summary
Sunnyside City parks officials reviewed pool operating costs from nearby cities, discussed lifeguard recruitment and certification barriers, and planned advertising and a hiring timeline to try to open the pool by Memorial Day weekend.
Sunnyside City parks and recreation board members spent most of their March meeting on plans for the community pool, reviewing operating costs from nearby cities, discussing lifeguard recruitment and certification and planning outreach and hiring to meet a target opening around Memorial Day weekend.
The board heard that Grandview estimated 2025 pool operating expenses at roughly $137,210 and generated about $14,800 in revenue, figures board members cited as an example while discussing staffing levels, hours and program-related costs. Board members said those costs reflected roughly 2.575 full-time-equivalent positions (including partial manager and lifeguard staffing) and that pool hours and the number of days open affected whether the pool could run without running deficits.
Board members focused on lifeguard recruitment and certification as the primary constraint on extending hours and the season. Members discussed outreach options including social media, high-school visits, banners at the pool and school announcements. The board said communities nearby — Grandview and Prosser — had already posted hiring notices, and the parks staff planned a joint recruiting effort with neighboring jurisdictions. The board also discussed using swim-team members as a recruitment pool and offering incentives such as season passes as a stipend for certified lifeguards.
On certification costs, members noted a typical lifeguard certification fee of about $180 and discussed the city reimbursing certification costs for hires as an incentive. They also explored cooperative approaches: locating a certified instructor to serve several nearby communities and seeking grant funds or swim-team partnerships to defray training expenses. One board member described a past arrangement where grants and swim-team participation cut lifeguard payroll costs by about half.
Board members and staff discussed operational details that affect costs: matching lifeguard staffing to actual attendance (for example, the contract the swim team used calls for three lifeguards per roughly 80–85 swimmers) and cross‑training lifeguards to serve as cashiers or other roles during slow periods to reduce excess staffing. Several members said last year’s late start, equipment failures (a pump/motor problem) and unnecessary overstaffing contributed to higher-than-expected costs.
Staff reported progress on pool equipment orders, including filtration components and covers, and said they believed the boiler/motor issues from last year had been addressed. The board agreed to move forward with advertising the lifeguard openings immediately and to produce an online application (with an optional QR code and printed copies at the high school counseling office) to make applying easier for students. Staff said the goal remains to have the pool open from Memorial Day weekend through Labor Day weekend if staffing and maintenance allow it.
The board scheduled follow-up operational meetings with pool staff and community partners to set exact staffing levels and training dates, and directed staff to begin advertising and recruiting immediately.
The board did not adopt new policy or approve a budget at the meeting; members said further details on staffing levels, certification reimbursements and any union implications would be worked out in follow-up discussions.
