HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/02/2009 04A Draft Minutes 04-28-2009 Study SessionYAKIMA CITY COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION
APRIL 28 2009 — 8:00 — 9:30 A.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS — YAKIMA CITY HALL
1. Roll Call
Present:
Council: Mayor Dave Edler, presiding, Assistant Mayor Micah Cawley, Council
Members Kathy Coffey, Rick Ensey, Bill Lover, and Sonia Rodriguez
Staff: City Manager Zais and City Clerk Moore
2. Aquatic Center
Mayor Edler introduced the Council Aquatic Task Force members: Council Member
Coffey, Assistant Mayor Cawley, and himself. He described the materials supplied
in the study session packet. The location has been narrowed down to the Yakima
Resource site by the Executive Aquatics Committee. That committee also
recommended not closing Franklin and Lions pools. They asked to have a break -
even fee schedule brought forward (approximately $10 per person for an adult.)
The construction cost for the proposed facility.has been adjusted and the packet
also contained ideas on the expected long -term costs. The costs have dropped
significantly from the original estimate. Also included are Selah's projected pool
projects and costs.
The packet contains a section of "frequently asked questions" and Mayor Edler
reviewed a number of them:
Why should the City build it rather than private enterprise? The study says, if it
were a profitable business, it would already be built. Silverwood, as an example of
a for - profit enterprise, has pricing of over $40 per day for an adult. A private entity
in Yakima would have to price it out of the range of many of our citizens' ability to
use.
Why the old Boise Cascade site? It is big, highly visible and accessible, and
Yakima Resource owners have committed to donate the 10 -12 acres needed.
How would Yakima pay for it? The land would be gifted. Construction could be
covered, if approved by the voters, by a .1 % sales tax. Operations would be
covered by admission fees and rentals. If the admission fees don't cover it all, any
annual shortfall would be covered by the City of Yakima. But, the projections of
revenue are very conservative and do not include tourists and out -of -town visitors.
What is the future of aquatics in Yakima? The long -term future of Franklin and
Lions pools is not known. They could have a lifespan of 10 -12 years, but repair
and maintenance costs will continue to increase substantially.
•
STUDY SESSION — AQUATICS
APRIL 28, 2009
Why can't the City of Yakima just pay for the pools? It is a question of choices with
other competing priority items, such as police and fire protection, street repair. Tank -
type pools are a thing of the past. Modern pool goers like the entertainment value
that comes with the broad range of options of an aquatics center.
Why not a 50 -meter pool to accommodate competitive swimmers and
tournaments? The costs associated with a 50 -meter pool are prohibitive and not
sustainable.
Why vote for it? In the projected budgets for Franklin pool, expenses are expected
to be almost $60,000 above revenues, and for Lions about $284,000 above. The
possible repair costs (worst case) for Franklin is over $500,000 and $280,000 for
Lions.
Also included in the packet was Selah's research for renovation funding for their
pool. They have a parks district and can go to the voters with a property tax
request in that service area. Their existing pools require a large subsidy from the
city to keep them functioning. He noted that they included an option for a mini -
aquatics center concept, which reinforces the claim that neighborhood tank pools
are not what people want anymore.
This aquatic stud process began two election cycles ago. At that time the Council
q YP 9 Y 9
.had a unified view to look into it. The study is complete. It identifies what they
believe to be the best funding source, a Public Facilities District (PFD). They have
not gotten a commitment on that from Union Gap or Selah. The mayor of Union
Gap has commented that they may not even be here by the time we ask for the
PFD. Selah has gone their own direction, which could influence our direction. The
most significant impact has been the drop in the economy. There has also been
multiple changes in the City Council.
Council Member Coffey likened the need to move forward during difficult times to
the renovation of downtown Yakima. If we had said it's not the right time and had
given up at that time, we would not have the streets and the downtown looking as it
does today. If you have a vision and you believe in this entire valley, you keep
going. We have an opportunity. The owners of the mill site want to help the
community and are willing to give us the land. An aquatic center would be a
feature that would make people understand this is a new Yakima Valley. It would
bring businesses in, and people who want to retire. Although this may not be the
time to put it up for a vote, it is the time to think about the future vision. Council
Member Cawley also supported the aquatic center idea and noted that it did
wonders for Moses Lake.
2
STUDY SESSION — AQUATICS
APRIL 28, 2009
Council Member Lover said it is time to move forward and made a decision on
taking this to the voters. Council Member Ensey said he thinks the aquatic center
idea is dead because Selah and Union Gap haven't committed to joining in. He
would like to see alternate solutions and suggests looking into building more pools.
He doesn't agree that people don't like tank pools anymore. If Franklin and Lions
pools aren't worth retrofitting, he would like to see three pools in replacement.
Council Member Rodriguez agreed that we should stick with the vision of an
aquatic center although now is probably not the time to ask voters for a tax
increase.
Discussion covered time factors. Mayor Edler noted that this has created
excitement. The development of the mill site is the most important development
that this community will face in this generation and getting it right is critical.
Putting the aquatic center there is a wonderful opportunity.
Parks and Recreation Manager Wilkinson, in response to comments about
rectangular pools, said they are on their way out. He compared them to the Pong
game versus the X -Box. People want more. The Executive Committee said.let's
leave Lions and Franklin pools out of the discussion and try to keep them open as
long as we can. It. was noted that most all of the school districts use Lions pool for
competitive swimming. The closing of that pool would be a devastating blow to the
high schools. Council Member Lover questioned whether the operating deficit of
the aquatic center could be somewhat relieved by privatizing. He also suggested
investigating whether we should do that for the current pools.
Consultant Greg McCracken of USKH, Inc. responded to questions regarding the
traditional tank -type facilities and neighborhood pools. In the last twenty years
there has been a substantial decline in the use of tank -type facilities for multiple
reasons; limited programs, limited water depths, doesn't engage multiple users, nor
multiple water temperatures. The aquatic centers expand on the ability to address
many needs, e.g. the aging population as well as children. Users are much more
interactive and expect more. An aquatic center creates a more sustainable facility.
There are inherent efficiencies in consolidating pools to one larger site e.g. staffing,
maintenance, etc.
3. Audience Comments
Tim Jensen, Treasury Services Officer, explained the financing options that were
supplied in the packet.
Bob Busse, Parks and Recreation Commission Chairman, endorsed the aquatic
center plan and spoke briefly about the decline of the pools over the years. He
expressed concern about not having anything signed with regard to the gifting of
the mill site. Council Member Coffey explained that we are working with the
owners but, until we can present them with a feasible plan, they are not ready to go
public with the gifting.
3
STUDY SESSION — AQUATICS
APRIL 28, 2009
•
r�
RODRIGUEZ MOVED AND CAWLEY SECONDED TO NOT CLOSE THE POOLS
THIS YEAR. Following discussion, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote.
Mayor Edler asked the Council for their recommendation on the project. He
emphasized the importance, and Yakima's responsibility, to be the regional center
for aquatics noting that lower valley communities have closed their pools. He also
referred to the development of the mill site as a great asset to our citizens and
community. He expressed concern about whether this Council has a unified vision
with regard to it. Because of the current economy, he doesn't recommend it
moving forward to the voters at this time, but he thinks we should maintain the
vision and continue to take small steps to accomplish it. CAWLEY MOVED AND
RODRIGUEZ SECONDED TO MOVE FORWARD ON THE AQUATICS CENTER.
Council Member Lover said he is against taking small steps and has five areas of
question; 1) are the partners on board (Selah and Union Gap; 2) what is the basic
design concept; 3) cost and site selection; 4) the funding source; and 5) an election
date. Each Council Member commented, and there was consensus that it is
necessary to meet with Union Gap and Selah for further discussion.. The motion
carried by unanimous voice vote.
4. Adjournment
CAWLEY MOVED AND COFFEY SECONDED TO ADJOURN. The motion
carried by unanimous voice vote. The meeting adjourned at 9:45 a.m.
READ AND CERTIFIED ACCURATE BY
COUNCIL MEMBER DATE
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
COUNCIL MEMBER DATE
DAVID EDLER, MAYOR
Minutes prepared by Linda Watkins. A CD and DVD of this meeting are available in the City Clerk's
Office
4