Swim Center Work

A black patch covers cracking in the lap pool.

Convinced that timing is the biggest issue when it comes to closing the pool for repairs, the City Council voted Aug. 19 to move forward with replastering the lap pool. It also approved:

• Parking lot improvements and related work to make the pool area more accessible

• Building two stormwater bioretention planters (to meet requirements)

• Installing EV charging stalls in the parking lot (if the city can get a grant).

A vote Tuesday night was necessary for the replastering to move ahead in time for the work to be done this winter rather than during months when the pool is most used, city staff said.

The estimated cost of replastering and other approved work is $2,311,000.

Can the City Do More?

On a 4-1 vote, the council also asked city staff to return in two months with information on whether it’s feasible to do more work on the pool soon – perhaps spending about $4.35 million. The goal would be to complete all needed Swim Center work.

Vice Mayor Gabe Quinto voted against the motion, saying he supported the $2.3 million in work that was approved Tuesday but not the request for staff to return with information on more comprehensive work at a higher cost.

Closing the Lap Pool Twice

To get the $2.3 million package done, the lap pool will have to close twice in the next two or three years. The small pool is expected to remain open through most of the work.

For replastering, which became a priority after a crack was found in the lap pool in March 2025, the pool would be closed for up to three months – hopefully from January through March of 2026.

To complete the parking lot and related ADA improvements, the pool would close again for up to five months from October 2026 through mid-March 2027, according to a city staff report.

It’s not possible to start all the work in January 2026 because preliminary work cannot be done in time, consultant Danny Stringer said.

Four Cost Options

At Tuesday night’s meeting, four possible options for phasing or completing Swim Center work were presented.

The option costs were $970,000 and $2,311,000 for doing part of work that will ultimately be needed, and $4,356,000, and $4,752,000 for completing the “full scope” of work.

All the estimates are significantly higher than those discussed in June of this year.

Why Estimates Are Higher

Public Works Director Yvetteh Ortiz said there were three main reasons for the higher numbers.

First, consultants who developed more detailed architectural and civil engineering assessments found that more work would be needed to comply with state building code.

Second, a 5% escalation cost was applied for work that will be done in 2026-27.

Third, installing a new water slide that was already purchased has become complicated after testing showed that columns and supports for the slide must be rebuilt.

In addition, Ortiz said the city’s project stabilization agreement stipulating certain conditions with labor on projects costing more than $1 million could result in unknown costs. The project stabilization agreement can reduce the number of companies who bid on projects, she said.

The parking lot does not meet requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Good News on General Fund Balance

City Finance Director and Treasurer Crystal Reams gave good news about the city’s general fund balance. She was projecting a $2.1 million deficit for the year that ended June 30. Now there is no projected deficit. Instead, the general fund is projected to end the fiscal year with a $600,000 surplus.

If the council chose one of the two lower-spending options, covering the cost from the general fund would still allow the city to meet its goal of keeping a 17% reserve, she said.

Saltzman Request for More Detail

The meeting took a surprising turn when council member Rebecca Saltzman said she was not satisfied with the information she had received about Swim Center options, and she was dismayed that the lap pool would have to close twice within a short time to get work done. Saltzman also said that given the increases in project costs, she worried that costs could rise even more if the work is delayed.

Saltzman said she wanted to hear about each component of Swim Center work, including costs, and about possible funding mechanisms to finish all pool work sooner.

Motoyama Considers Reducing 17% Reserve

Council member Lisa Motoyama said she is a fiscal conservative but she would consider a $4.35 million option to get all pool work done. Motoyama asked what the financing options might look like if the city “borrowed from ourselves” to pay for the full scope of pool repairs, including pool deck replacement and interior locker room upgrades.

“I would be comfortable going below a 17% reserve,” Motoyama said.

She said one funding source is Measure H, the city’s permanent special tax for swim center pools and other recreation.

Measure H Not Enough

However, City Treasurer Crystal Reams and Recreation Director Chris Jones said Measure H funds are already being used for other things and the money it brings in would not be enough to repay the amount needed for a $4.35 million project.

Budgeting Ideas from FAB

Prior to the vote on Swim Center work, the council heard three recommendations from its Financial Advisory Board (FAB). Two of those recommendations were intended to allow the city to be better prepared for situations like repairs that became urgent when cracking occurred in the lap pool.

Funding Maintenance a Little at a Time

FAB Vice Chair David Carvel said he and a majority of FAB members would like to see the city develop a maintenance fund for long-lived assets like the pool, fire trucks, or firefighters’ breathing equipment. Carvel said FAB members have noticed a trend over the last few years of large one-time expenses that are predictable but are not in the budget.

“Rather than have a shock of a big one-time expense, what we recommend is a different method,” Carvel said.

Council members responded by saying that the city is already looking into how it can use this type of approach.

Councilmember Saltzman said when she was a BART director the agency established funds to do replacement, ideally ahead of failure, and “it worked out really well and made the system more reliable.”

“My understanding is staff are already working on this so I’d like to hear what’s already in process,” Saltzman added.

Finance Director Reams said she and her staff are working on how to include this kind of approach in the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) with the next biennial budget cycle.

Where’s the Money?

“We already have in place CIP funds for maintenance and a fund for vehicle and equipment replacement,” Reams said. “The issue right now is that we’re not funding them. The goal with the next biennial budget cycle is to start funding those but of course, the money has to come from somewhere.”

Councilmember Motoyama said, “I think we are all agreed that this is really important, and I think I mentioned that the reason we don’t have this is that the city was not able to put anything aside.”

A Set-Aside for One-Time Needs

In addition, FAB Vice Chair Carvel said, a majority of FAB members would like to see the city set aside 2% of general fund operating expenditures to cover mid-year expenses or one-time needs.

“One-time expenses over the past few years have ranged from 2% to 8% and that’s a lot,” Carvel said.

Council member William Ktsanes asked how the 2% set-aside would be different from increasing the city’s total general fund reserves from 17% to 19%. Carvel said increasing the reserves would accomplish the same thing.

Ktsanes said, “When I look at your proposal, I agree with the spirit of it – to have that cushion. But to me it seems like the appropriate path towards that is to have the appropriate amount of reserves,” Ktsanes said.

Ktsanes added that he was not saying the current reserves are inadequate. But he would like to see a future discussion about the size of reserves and when it’s appropriate to spend that money.

“Moderately Conservative” Pension Investment

The FAB’s final recommendation was to stay with the city’s current “moderately conservative” investment portfolio for Section 115 trust money that has been set aside to pay pension costs. Carvel said the approach makes sense because that money will probably be spent within the next four years to “smooth out” pension costs.

The council did not vote or give any staff direction based on the recommendations.

Mayor Carolyn Wysinger said, “Thank you for your input. We look forward to continuing to have this collaborative conversation about our budgeting when budget season starts up again.”