The Litchfield City Council and the Litchfield School Board are slated to meet at 6 p.m. July 9 in the Wagner Education Building to begin joint conversations about the community’s need for a new swimming pool or other aquatic facility.
At a brief meeting Monday evening, the council agreed to meet with the board at that time.
The council, which has been mulling aquatic projects for years, concluded this past spring that it does not have the resources to develop a full-fledged recreation center with indoor pools on its own. (Cost figures mentioned by city officials for such a facility have ranged from $10 million to $14 million.)
With some changes in its tax revenue or long-term capital plans, however, the council has surmised that it could potentially manage a more modest outdoor pool and wading pool costing between $4 million to $5 million.
Covering a medium-sized outdoor pool so it could have an extended season would raise the price to about $8 million, according to figures presented by a pool consultant in April. However, some council members appear reluctant to settle for a modest facility if potential partners for a recreation center with a regulation-size competitive pool and other amenities that would attract more users could be found.
During recent meetings, most city councilors have expressed interest in having this be a voter-approved project funded by a small citywide sales tax. Such a tax could generate about $330,000 per year, or enough to pay off a $4.5 million bond over 20 years, City Administrator Dave Cziok has explained.
The only way the council could manage the cost without a referendum would be to delay other scheduled capital projects and divert a large portion of the city’s capital budget toward a pool. This latter option has not garnered much enthusiasm from the council in recent weeks, as it is not certain how long other projects could reasonably be deferred.
To get a pool project on the 2018 ballot would be a daunting task, several counselors indicated Monday evening, as the deadline is Aug. 8. The next opportunity for a general ballot referendum would be in 2020, and the city would need permission from the state legislature to conduct a special election for this purpose.
Another question looming in councilors’ minds is how eager the public would be to vote for a pool without yet having a specific design in mind. It would also be helpful to know the ongoing operational costs, several city officials said. Cziok explained that the referendum language does not need to specify a certain plan, but before placing a question before voters, the council needs to clearly: 1) identify the project, 2) state how much or how long the city would collect sales tax to pay for the project, and 3) if the city plans to issue debt, that must be stated.
Cziok said school-city agreements have been used to build aquatic centers in other Minnesota cities. Various legal options for establishing such partnerships can be considered, he added.
