City delays vote on pool projects for 4 months

Editor’s note: This story has been updated since it originally was published.

A $77 million bond to fund two swimming pool replacements and purchase a recreation center from Sanford Health has been delayed until September.

City officials and Sioux Falls City Council members will spend the next four months delving further into the operational business model for the facilities — how much it would cost the public to use them versus how much the city would contribute in subsidies.

“We’ve adjusted the process. The overall project timeline and the overall project deliverables are the same,” City Council vice chair Rich Merkouris said.

The City Council had been scheduled to consider the bond approval at its first two meetings in May, the last meetings for four of its eight members.

Last week as the concepts for an indoor recreation center at Frank Olson Park and an outdoor aquatic center at Kuehn Park were presented, councilors raised questions about the projected cost for people to use the new facilities, including the west-side indoor recreation center that would be created by buying the Sanford Wellness Center on 32nd Street near Ellis Road.

“Accessibility is a real priority,” Merkouris said. “We’ve all known that. Everybody agrees families that can pay should pay what seems to be a reasonable rate so every family has access.”

The question becomes how much should visitor revenue from indoor recreation centers and outdoor pools cover the total cost to operate them.

The Midco Aquatic Center was covering about 70 percent of its expenses before 2020, “but between inflation and increased salaries to employees, that subsidy has grown,” director of parks and recreation Don Kearney said. “We entered into a three-year phase-in plan for rates back in 2016, and since 2019, we’ve not increased those rates.”

That means the city’s general operating fund is contributing about $1 million a year to fund the center.

The new indoor east-side and west-side recreation centers would be slightly larger buildings than the Midco Aquatic Center but also would have somewhat different uses and staffing requirements.

Projections shown to the City Council last week indicate that it could cost $40 for an individual per month, $50 per month for a couple and $60 for a family membership package to each facility. That still would put the city at subsidizing 15 percent of operating costs.

But those rates are open to change, director of finance Shawn Pritchett said, adding that the additional time before approving a bond will allow city officials to explore opportunities for sponsorships and naming rights to offset some operating costs. There also could be an option for residents to buy a pass good at any facility.

In comparison, the outdoor pools typically require the city to subsidize about 80 percent of their operating costs.

Indoor recreation centers elsewhere in the nation typically involve cities subsidizing 30 percent or less, with some breaking even.

The city’s timeline for approving the aquatics bond was driven by the concluding terms for half of the City Council members.

“Admittedly, that’s been a huge piece of this,” Merkouris said.

“We wanted to respect the councilors who have put in a lot of time on this, and we’ve been pushing the administration to do this out of respect for the councilors as well. But a couple of those said, ‘Don’t push this just for our sake.’ And that definitely changed the tune over the last seven to 10 days.”

Next steps

The current City Council still will cast a number of votes this month related to the future of aquatics in the city. On Tuesday, councilors voted unanimously to move a $9 million supplemental appropriation to purchase the Sanford Wellness Center at 8701 W. 32nd St. to a second reading on May 14. If approved, that will allow the city to begin the process of acquiring it.

“I think we’ll have support for it,” Pritchett said. “There’s a general consensus of support. They’ve acknowledged the opportunity that exists with this acquisition. It’s a rarity you would have this kind of opportunity arise at the very point in time you’re seeking to increase the amount of indoor recreation space.”

The City Council also voted Tuesday on master plans for Frank Olson and Kuehn parks that detail not just the pool replacement plans but other outdoor improvements. The vote on Frank Olson was 6-2. The vote on Kuehn Park was 7-1.

The next two months also will be filled with conversations about the broader approach the city takes to fees related to its pools. Recommendations could include adjusted rates based on income and more ongoing fee increases so the city keeps pace with rising costs.

“We’ll be doing a lot of listening to understand their expectations in terms of a policy related to fees for indoor recreation and overall for parks in general,” Pritchett said.

“The hope is we would be able to get to the parks board June 25 and then hopefully approval of some policy on fees in early July so we can have that embedded in the budget for 2025.”

Broader plan

From there, payments on the pool bond as well as projected operating costs would be included both in the city’s proposed 2025 operating budget and its new 2025-29 capital improvements program.

The budget is scheduled for a final vote Sept. 10, which would be the same day the aquatics bond is scheduled.

The timing still would allow the pool projects to move forward with some design this year and the new pools to open by 2027.

The budget approval also will include conversation about a new outdoor pool for south Sioux Falls. The city is considering property adjacent to the Harrisburg Freshman Academy near 85th Street and Cliff Avenue. The coming months will include a deep look at infrastructure development and growth projections in the area, along with opportunity to meet with both the Harrisburg School District and the city of Harrisburg about the potential project.

“I think the council is just looking for clarity on when and how, and that allows us to get the clarity,” Merkouris said.

While there are multiple questions to answer in the coming months, “these projects, moving forward, once successfully implemented sets us up for the next 20 years for aquatics,” Kearney said.

“Terrace and Laurel Oak are good another 20 years or more. We put some shade structures in, but we’re going to be in a really good spot long term.”

City identifies location for new south-side pool