Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Parks Recreation Procurement topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council reviews pool chlorination system purchase and outdoor pool roof bids

West Valley City Council · August 26, 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

Parks staff asked the council to approve a $175,216.11 purchase of a chlorine‑generation system for the indoor pool, citing annual chlorine cost savings of about $30,000–$35,000 and reduced hazardous deliveries; staff also presented bids for Centennial outdoor pool roof replacement and recommended a lower bid despite a large disparity in proposals.

Parks and recreation staff presented two capital items: a chlorine‑generation (saltwater) system for the indoor pool and a roof replacement for the Centennial outdoor pool.

Candace Whitaker, Family Fitness Center director, summarized the chlorine‑generation proposal and its finances: the purchase price is $175,216.11, and staff estimated current chlorine deliveries cost the city roughly $30,000–$35,000 per year. Aquatics supervisor Clint Burnham said switching to a salt‑based generator would reduce hazardous chlorine deliveries, lower recurring chemical and acid purchases and provide an estimated 2.5‑year payback in operating savings. Whitaker and Burnham noted routine maintenance (replacement of electrodes and components) is required over the equipment’s lifetime.

On the Centennial outdoor pool roof replacement, staff reported two responsible bids were received: Done Right Roofing ($136,400) and American Roofing Company (recorded in the packet as $37,25). Parks staff recommended moving forward with American Roofing Company to address shrinking roofing material and major leaks that are causing drainage and facility damage. Council asked questions about the large price disparity; a contractor representative said differences in warranty and scope likely explained the variation and staff said they had vetted references.

Council did not take a final vote during the meeting; questions about long‑term maintenance, cost verification and procurement documentation were discussed. Staff said they would return with contract documents and any additional clarifications.