Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Recreation Aquatics topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press council to fix Bellehaven pool access as staff weigh costlier city-run options
Summary
After public comment decried limited hours and frequent closures, councilmembers debated four operational options for the Bellehaven pool — from continuing the current cost-share contract to a city-run model — and asked staff to pursue immediate communication fixes and explore a pilot or re-solicitation while avoiding a closure.
Councilmembers and residents pressed city staff March 24 to resolve persistent access and maintenance problems at the Bellehaven pool and to clarify how alternative operations would affect the city's budget.
Staff presented four options: continue the current cost-share contract; a hybrid where the operator supplies lifeguards and the city supplies programming; a fully city-managed model (with estimated staffing and operating-cost ranges); or a re-solicitation for a new operator. The presentation summarized a community aquatic survey (624 respondents, 61 Bellehaven residents), recent closures for mechanical failures, and proposals to expand affordable hours and youth programming.
Multiple residents, including longtime users and senior-center patrons, urged a publicly run schedule with more affordable hours and clearer programming. "This pool has not served our community reliably," one resident said during the public-comment period. Speakers recommended that the city move program information from the private operator's website to the city site, expand bilingual outreach, and prioritize scheduling that serves working families and older adults.
Council debate focused on cost, schedule disruption, and short-term continuity. Staff said a city-managed model would require significant additional annual subsidy (staff presented ranges in the presentation materials and referenced a possible $1.4million to $1.7million figure depending on staffing assumptions), and that converting to a city-run operation could take six months to a year and might temporarily require closure for retooling. Several councilmembers said they opposed a closure and preferred options that keep the pool operating while staff negotiate with the current operator or explore a pilot.
Council agreed on a set of near-term instructions: improve communications (including posting city-run program information on the city website and clarifying hours), pursue discussions with the current operator about additional hours and program changes, and return with a clearer cost comparison and financing plan. Several members recommended a pilot or targeted contract terms to test alternatives without abrupt service interruption.
The study-session discussion produced no final policy change; staff will return with a recommended path and financial detail.
