Council study session focuses on staffing, budget and partner agreement at Indianola Wellness Campus

At a City Council study session on the Indianola Wellness Campus (IWC), Heather, executive director of the IWC, told council members the campus is struggling with unfilled elements of the transition into the city’s organization, staffing shortages, deferred maintenance and unclear partnership responsibilities.

Heather said staff "have been patient, but have grown weary and are frustrated. The burnout is a reality of our circumstance." She asked the council for clearer direction on pay-scale integration, funding commitments for salary and building needs, and a schedule for follow-up meetings.

The discussion centered on three near-term priorities Heather identified: updating the existing 20/80 partnership agreement that governs how city, Simpson College and the local school district share costs and facility use; finishing a compensation/grade integration so IWC staff sit on the city pay scale; and short-term revenue steps such as establishing a 501(c)(3) fiscal vehicle to receive donations and sponsorships.

On the 20/80 agreement, Heather said partners originally contributed about $750,000 toward construction of the facility but that recurring maintenance and some replacement costs now fall to the IWC budget. She told council the campus sent a report in October laying out direct and indirect costs associated with competition swimming and other partner uses; she and several council members said that those costs need to be revisited with Simpson and other partners so the campus is not carrying all long-term operating costs alone.

Council members and staff agreed the 20/80 update should not be negotiated in isolation. Multiple council members urged Heather to work with Doug Fulton and Wade (both present as city staff and council representatives, respectively) and suggested a small working group or steering committee including city legal/administrative staff and a council member to begin formal talks as soon as possible.

Heather described the campus staffing situation as a major operational risk. She said the campus currently has roughly three to four full‑time staff and a larger number of part‑time employees, many of whom are seasonal lifeguards and student workers. She said a compensation study commissioned after the transition has not been implemented and that the mismatch between current pay and comparable city positions is driving turnover. Heather asked that human resources, Parks and Recreation leadership and campus management clarify who is responsible for implementing pay and grade changes and for longer‑term succession planning.

Councilors proposed operational fixes to reduce duplication with the city’s parks and recreation operation, including better coordination of lifeguard hiring and countywide seasonal staffing so city employees could more easily work across facilities. Heather cautioned that the facility’s operating hours, different pool types and program mix mean lifeguard and manager duties are not identical to other city pools, so any integration of staffing would require job‑description and pay adjustments.

Competitive swimming programs were a central concern. Heather said the campus hosts multiple competition teams and that operating the teams has generated expenses the campus did not originally plan to absorb. She said lane limitations (eight lanes) limit growth, and that she recommended transitioning at least one youth “turtle” team to an independent booster/club structure by fiscal 2027 so the program can grow without further burdening campus operations. Council members said partner teams should cover more of the incremental costs for practice time, meet staffing and pool supervision.

As a near‑term fundraising step, councilors and Heather discussed using the Indianola Community Foundation as a fiscal agent (a “friends” fund) so donors can give immediately while the campus explores a standalone 501(c)(3). Heather said she had scheduled an introductory meeting with Todd Kalkhoff of the Community Foundation to explore establishing a separate fund for the campus and that the foundation’s existing endowments show the model is established and can be implemented quickly.

Council members also raised operating expenses such as snow removal and grounds maintenance. A council speaker noted a single snow‑removal bill of roughly $4,000 and referenced a city snow‑removal budget figure of about $40,000; participants discussed whether maintenance and seasonal services could be bundled into citywide bids or managed by another department to reduce duplicate contracting costs.

Multiple council members and a public commenter raised concerns about internal perceptions and staff morale. One resident who identified themselves as a former trustee said she had heard derogatory comments questioning whether Heather should be director; the commenter asked council and senior staff to address what she described as "resentment" from some city stakeholders and to ensure campus staff are treated as city employees.

Next steps identified at the session included convening Doug Fulton, Heather and Wade (and other relevant staff such as HR and legal) to begin drafting revisions to the 20/80 agreement; pursuing the Community Foundation meeting this week to set up a fiscal fund for donations; exploring staffing and compensation integration with HR; and scheduling a follow‑up study session (council members discussed aiming for early March) to review progress.

Council members emphasized they want the campus to be financially sustainable without assuming the campus can cover large capital repairs or equipment replacement from membership revenue alone. Several members suggested a short‑term plan to reduce the annual deficit through a combination of targeted fundraisers, clearer partner cost‑sharing and limited capital requests in the city’s capital improvement plan. Heather said she will provide needed financial detail and continue to work with staff, trustees and partners on both operational fixes and longer‑term governance questions.

The public study session concluded with council members and staff agreeing to reconvene and to give Heather and city staff space to form the working group, continue 501(c)(3) discussions and return with more concrete numbers and proposals.