After attending the swimming pool open house, I understand some of the issues with the current facility. I question whether fixing the leaking problem in the current pool and upgrading the facility has ever been seriously considered. However, I do not support the proposed location of a new pool, and the projected size and cost.

The proposed location is currently private property the City would have to purchase, taking it off the tax role. This property should remain on the tax role and available in the future for potential growth of a private business. I also understand the city would not be able to purchase all the required property, but would have to lease some, thus increasing costs. The City currently owns enough property where a new pool could be constructed, Independence Park is one example. Or is there school property, in the Middle School/Southview Elementary area that might be available on a “shared basis”?

The streets bordering the proposed location are two of the busiest streets in town. There will be significant increased risks of kids getting hit by cars walking or riding bikes to a pool in this location.

The city stated the projected costs of a new pool would be $18.37 million, which is understated. I don’t believe this includes the additional costs for the land purchase and lease. The city is using an interest rate of 5.08%, lower than current interest costs, which will increase along with actual costs. The initial total costs with interest for the proposed pool would be $36 million to $37 million, or more and would not be paid off until 2046.

Pools in this area are open three months a year and to pay off this proposed debt would cost $1.6 million or more per year. This does not include the land purchase/lease costs, and any increased operational costs for the proposed new pool.

City staff has told me the new pool would require up to an additional 20 lifeguards/staff per year. Also, I understand the city would not be able to use sales tax money for any capital improvements or maintenance costs over the life of any project funded initially by a sales tax. These costs will require additional taxpayer money that’s also not included in the $1.6 million or more per year.

To commit 100% of the proposed sales tax revenue to a project that is utilized only 25% of a year, sitting vacant and not being used 75% of a year does not seem fiscally responsible to me. It also eliminates any possibilities for using sales tax revenue for anything else in the city until after 2046.

According to an article in the Minneapolis Tribune on 6/14/23, the City of Crystal, a suburb of Minneapolis had a similar problem with their swimming pool leaking 18,000 gallons per day, 3,000 gallons more per day than the Marshall Pool. The city of Crystal went to the State Legislature for help and received $2.35 million from the bonding bill and $3 million from the city and they corrected the leaking problem in the current pool and replaced some equipment with the $5.35 million.

At the pool open house, I showed this article to city staff and asked if the city approached the legislature for financial assistance with the pool issue.

I was surprised by their negative response.

Here is the link to that article.

https://www.startribune.com/crys tal-opts-to-fix-pool-leaking-18000-gallons-a-day/600282270/

— Ron Labat is a resident of Marshall