Shoreline staff proposes MPD ballot measure to fund $95M indoor pool; council discusses levy, design and equity

Shoreline staff told the City Council on May 11 they plan to ask voters in November 2026 whether to form a Metropolitan Park District (MPD) to build and operate a new indoor pool facility and related recreational amenities.

Hillary Dela Cruz, the city’s senior management analyst and project manager for the pool exploration project, said the draft ballot title and staff recommendation would limit MPD funds to a pool facility and potential future recreational facilities and that the MPD is the only mechanism that can fund both capital and long-term operations. “This is a discussion item with no action tonight from council,” Dela Cruz said. She summarized a preliminary plan for a 48,000-square-foot facility that would include a leisure/recreation pool, an eight-lane 25-yard lap pool with starting platforms and diving, and a hydrotherapy pool aimed at therapy and older-adult programs.

Why it matters: staff modeling shows the MPD would need to generate roughly $8.8 million annually to support a 20-year financing plan that pays $95 million in construction costs and about $7.25 million in annual debt service. Staff recommended writing the ballot title with the maximum levy set at $0.75 per $1,000 of assessed value (the statutory maximum) while signaling an anticipated levy of $0.55 per $1,000 to produce the modeled revenue. Using April 2026 values, staff estimated that a median-valued home ($831,000) would pay about $421 a year under the modeled scenario — about $35 per month.

Council members pressed staff on design and financial trade-offs. One council member asked whether the plan includes a hot tub; Dela Cruz invited a staff colleague, Mary, to answer. Mary explained the advisory committee and staff recommended a hydrotherapy pool (roughly 90–94°F) rather than a traditional hot tub because hydrotherapy pools are heavily used for physical therapy, arthritis classes and other programming and they have lower ongoing maintenance and operating costs than hot tubs. “Hydrotherapy pools are probably the most used body of water in their pool, with physical therapy, with arthritis classes, MS classes,” Mary said.

Equity and tax-burden questions came up repeatedly. A council member asked whether new multifamily construction would shift tax burden to single-family homeowners because of multifamily tax-exemption programs. Staff said that the multifamily tax exemption (MFTE) applies to select low-income units and that the city would provide a written clarification at a subsequent meeting; staff emphasized that MPD revenue would be a voter-approved, separate levy and not drawn from the general fund.

Several council members voiced support for putting the question to voters while urging staff to include more explicit schedule-risk fallbacks and clearer public communications about potential future facilities if the MPD is formed. “We’ve been talking about this for literally years,” one council member said, calling the pool important for swim safety, therapy and recreation. Another council member recited local drowning statistics and framed access to swim lessons as a life-safety issue: “Drowning is the number one cause of death for children 4 years and under,” she said, adding that drowning incidents had increased in recent years.

What was not decided: The council took no action on Resolution 562 tonight. Staff recommended returning the resolution for a formal vote on June 1 if council directs staff to proceed with the ballot title and levy parameters. Staff said that if voters approve the MPD, levy collections would begin in 2028 and the MPD board would be composed of Shoreline City Council members acting as commissioners, with MPD revenue transferred to the city under a council-approved service agreement.

Context and next steps: staff estimated the upfront general-election cost to place the measure on the ballot at roughly $150,000. The staff presentation noted an anticipated operating subsidy need of about $1.55 million annually (to be covered by MPD revenue in the model) to keep user fees affordable. Councilmembers asked staff to return with clarified MFTE calculations, explicit contingency plans for schedule and cost risk, and more detailed communication plans about how future recreational facilities might be phased.

The item will return to council for possible formal action on June 1; staff emphasized the purpose of tonight’s presentation was to gather council feedback and refine the ballot materials.