Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legion Pool Replacement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
De Pere council hears $5M-plus funding gap for planned Legion Pool replacement
Summary
City staff told the Common Council that Legion Pool needs continuing repairs and that a conceptual replacement now projects about $10.5 million, leaving a roughly $5–7 million shortfall under the current referendum and bonding assumptions. Councilors discussed design changes, fundraising and other revenue options.
City of De Pere staff told the Common Council on May 19 that Legion Pool is aging, requires ongoing repairs and that the city faces a multimillion-dollar funding gap to replace it under the pool design approved earlier in the planning process.
Staff member Marty, presenting the 2025 aquatic report, said the city projects a conceptual cost of about $10.5 million to replace Legion Pool. "That amount is subject to change," Marty said, adding that the 50‑plus‑year‑old facility has experienced recurring repairs including a recent boiler replacement, sewer-line work and a persistent leak that last year increased water loss to 10,000–11,000 gallons per day.
Marty told councilors the city’s current pool referendum generates roughly $900,000 annually but, after accounting for operating costs and projected debt service, that level of revenue would only support a substantially smaller bond (staff estimated a roughly $3.2 million pool on a 10‑year bond or about $5.3 million over 20 years). "So we are somewhere between 5.2 million and 7.3 million short from our projected cost of Legion Pool in its current design," Marty said.
Alderperson Hanson (who corrected an earlier reference to the referendum date) reminded the council that the referendum was approved in November 2018 and urged that the council find a solution without shifting the burden back to residents. "When the residents voted to approve the referendum, they had the understanding that we would get two new pools," Hanson said. "If there is a financing gap, I think it's on us to find a solution without putting the burden back onto the residents."
Kim, a city staff member, told the council that the referendum language did not prohibit exploring other funding sources and that staff would present options for council consideration. "We can show the impact on the taxpayer, and we can show the impact on other capital projects that are currently being considered," Kim said.
Councilors discussed a range of options: revising the pool design to reduce scope and cost, soliciting sponsorships and fundraising, asking neighboring communities to contribute for nonresident access, or pursuing additional general bonding to supplement the referendum. Several council members expressed urgency about acting sooner rather than later because construction and operating costs are rising.
Councilors asked staff to return with options and additional analysis. The presentation was designated informational; no formal action or binding decision on funding was taken at the meeting.
What happened next: staff indicated they will return to council with scenarios and community engagement options for addressing the funding gap and potential schedule adjustments for design and construction.
