Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Aquatic Center topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents question $10 price tag for Baldwin County’s new aquatic center; commissioners cite operating costs
Summary
At a Baldwin County work session residents pressed commissioners for clarity on a proposed $10 aquatic center fee, while commissioners and staff said the number was borrowed from a nearby county and that operating costs and grant-funded capital are separate issues.
Residents at a Baldwin County Commission work session raised concerns about access and affordability of the new aquatic center, pressing the board to explain a proposed $10 admission fee and how the facility will be run.
Cynthia Edwards, who identified herself as a Baldwin County Recreation Department retiree and president of the local NAACP chapter, asked where the $10 figure originated and whether it is an all‑day rate or limited by age groups. "Where did the scope come from? How did the scale come about with $10?" she asked, noting that neighboring counties charge between about $6 and $12.
Commissioners and staff responded that the $10 starting point was modeled on Dublin’s pricing and that the new facility’s design mirrored Dublin’s. Staff also reported roughly $6,000,000 in grant money for the aquatic center and pickleball courts combined, which covered capital costs but not ongoing operations.
Board members described why a user fee may be necessary for sustainable operation. Commissioner Hall said the pool will require lifeguards, chemicals, maintenance and concessions and recalled an older county pool that fell into disrepair when fees were too low. "The users need to pay the vast majority of it," Hall said, arguing that modest admission charges help keep the facility operable rather than require ongoing property-tax support.
Speakers suggested mitigation options: family seasonal passes, discounted days, community partnerships with churches and civic groups to support access for lower-income residents, and exemptions or reduced fees for public‑service workers. Commissioners said no final fee has been set; they will revisit numbers as operating costs become clearer and as the rec committee gathers stakeholder input.
The board also discussed intergovernmental questions, including whether the city could share water costs for the pool; officials said that negotiation is part of ongoing joint meetings.
No fee was adopted at the work session; staff and commissioners said further review and committee work will precede any final decision.
