news-record.com

NEWS

Council wants more facts about aquatic center

Thursday, December 3, 2009
(Updated Friday, December 4 - 5:20 am)

— It’s not that they have anything against a new swim center for Greensboro, the newest City Council members said Wednesday.

They just want to understand what they’re getting into before they sign any multimillion-

dollar agreements.

“The question boils down to when and how much?” new Mayor Bill Knight said of the new City Council decision to rethink the previous council’s decision to approve an

$18.3 million aquatics center at the Greensboro Coliseum. “Is now the right time when there is a lot of negativity out there about spending money?”

City Council members could get the answers they seek next week at a scheduled briefing Monday or a retreat at week’s end. The issue of the pool construction contract and its financing will be on the council’s agenda again on Dec. 15.

In May, the City Council asked the city staff to plan quickly for a competitive swim facility at the Greensboro Coliseum, to be funded in part by a $12 million in bonds approved by voters in 2008.

The aquatic center would be designed to bring in major youth swim events and championships.

Since then the city has spent $1.28 million to design the swim facility.

But City Council members were left to decide how to fill a funding gap after bids for the facility came back at $19.7 million.

Hours before the new council was sworn in Tuesday, the previous council approved the construction contract and agreed to fund the gap with hotel-tax revenue.

The new council wants to take a second look at that decision — especially considering that it will have to approve the final financial details of the project.

“I need to understand the financing method a little better,” new Councilwoman Nancy Vaughan said.

“I’m not saying we should throw the facility out. I just want a chance to review it since it will be built during our tenure.”

Some of the new council members expressed confusion about the hotel taxes and how they can be used and whether the city’s taxpayers will have to pick up the

tab for construction costs or debt.

“I am told the taxpayers won’t bear the brunt,” new Councilman Jim Kee said. “I need to be brought up to speed if that is the case.”

Council members also wondered whether there was still an opportunity to attract private or nonprofit funding for the project — although efforts to attract other funding have been fruitless.

Councilman Danny Thompson , who first raised the issue with the new council Tuesday night, wondered whether the three-pool complex was necessary.

“I’d like to really take a long hard look at that,” Thompson said. “Do we need the diving platform?”

Kim Strable , president of the Greensboro Sports Commission, which is responsible for recruiting sporting events to the city, said the aquatics center was designed to meet international competition standards, giving it the ability to attract a wider range of events.

If the city scales back the project to one that could host local swim events, the complex would not have the projected $14.5 million annual economic impact, said Henri Fourrier , director of the Greensboro Area Convention and Visitors Bureau.

“If the council goes back to the community pool, I will have nothing to sell,” Fourrier said. “Maybe there will be some smaller city meets, but nothing to the effect we talked about.”

Councilman Robbie Perkins said he hopes that the new council members will see the merit of the project when they see the full financial picture.


Contact Amanda Lehmert at 373-7075 or amanda.lehmert@news-record.com

 

Accompanying Photos

Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

AirDoc

December 3, 2009 - 7:09 am EST

Thank goodness someone with a brain has intervened in this fiasco. What was council thinking when they allowed lame duck members to vote on an issue like this just minutes before a new council was sworn in? Each council member who was involved in this owes Greensboro taxpayers a personal explanation for such a stupid maneuver. No outgoing council member has a right to vote on a matter like this as they are walking out the door.

Interested

December 3, 2009 - 7:56 am EST

Actually, they do have the right. They were still duly elected officials. But there are times when one should not necessarily exercise a given right. Given the nature of this situation, this was probably one of those times.

AirDoc

December 3, 2009 - 3:11 pm EST

Of course they do legally - I wasn't suggesting anything unlawful was done. I was mixing logic in what lately has been a no-logic zone. I should know better. I was referring to good sense. Thanks Mayor Knight for getting things off to a good start.

uncwgm

December 3, 2009 - 8:42 am EST

Obviously, those outgoing candidate have no plans to run for office again.

fisher

December 3, 2009 - 11:45 am EST

Don't outgoing presidents give pardons to dozens in the weeks prior to leaving office? The comments here make it seem like the outgoing councilmembers' actions were unprecedented.

d_random

December 3, 2009 - 8:49 am EST

The citizens of Greensboro voted for a community pool, something that benefits everyone, not just those that can afford to be on a swim team. Also, the citizens also just approved $12 Million, not $20 million.

Mick

December 3, 2009 - 9:57 am EST

Why do you think this will not serve the general community?

jeaniegnc

December 3, 2009 - 9:16 am EST

After reading comments from the new city council members, I am impressed with their desire to listen to the taxpayers and not follow blindly what another outgoing council passed at the last hour. City council members who think independently and listen to the people they represent is what we have been needing for over a decade. We don't need a city council that "just tries to get along and give everybody their chance to speak". We do need a city council that thinks about what is best for the people that elected them. If these new council members continue to do this, I believe we will see some positive changes for our city. Congratulations and continue the good work.

Mick

December 3, 2009 - 9:59 am EST

Here, we are in agreement. It would have been very easy to just write this off as "the other council's issue". But they didnt. Obviously, we hope for differant outcomes but I am impressed with the courage of the new council regardless of that outcome.

rightwingnemesis

December 3, 2009 - 2:24 pm EST

Mick,
You have made many good and quite valid points in supporting this project. I am in agreement that this is not only needed but will also have an economic impact. Most of the opponents of this probably love NASCAR and go to some the races. I don't, but I have no doubts about the impact of racing on their communities. Oh, and before some wiseacre starts in on it, while tracks are privately owned, they have, and continue to receive public dollars!

I have witnessed the vibrant swimming here in this area and I have also seen the sheer numbers who attend meets in Hillsborough. To hear these naysayers talk, you would think the folks there bring bag lunches and do not contribute to the local economy. Additionally, it would draw from all around this area and into Virginia.

Beachwalk

December 3, 2009 - 5:16 pm EST

Since Mick and rightwingnemesis is sooooooo sure of the economic impact, I'm sure the two of them would be more than willing to sign a note agreeing to pay whatever difference there might be is the city does not see the total $14.5 million impact. If the two of them are not willing to put up, then the city shouldn't count on any economic impact.

Mick

December 3, 2009 - 7:06 pm EST

BW, That is a useless comment and Im quite tired of hearing it but i guess that cuts both ways.

I didnt do the study. I havent seen the study. I couldnt cipher it if I had it in my hand.

But I know what some choose to simply not believe. People will come. Swimmers, families and coaches. They will stay in hotels, eat, shop, go to movies and by gas along High Point Rd and elsewhere. And yes even folks from as close as Raliegh and Charlotte will sometimes stay in hotels depending on the start/finish times, number of days, level of meets and other sometimes personal factors. Most will spend money. We will collect taxes. There will be rental fees for practices, meets and other events. How many weekends, How much moola? I dont really know for sure. More info will be made available to the new council I am sure. It is all conjecture hopefully based on fact, history, similar facilities, etc. For some those details matter but for Beachwalk and some others ... not so much really. They dont want this or any facility under most circumstances. That is fine and dandy and much of their reasonings are arguable but legitimate. I really dont have a problem with their opinions. I do tire of the prattle about grannies in cricks and personal notes to cover shortfalls, and we have plenty or adequate facilities, etc.

#1 Granny might of crapped in an outhouse and walked to one room school house too. There may be things Granny or Gramps said and did that they arent so proud of now. The good old days werent and arent always good sometimes they are just old.

#2 It simply doesnt work that way and repeating it isnt funny or witty and doesnt further the discussion in any way. But have it.

#3: We dont

Will the world come to an end if we end up with nada... nope. WIll the world come to an end if the GAC goes up as is.... nope. It is out of our hands at this point.

No one I know has said this thing will operate at a profit. It wont. Just like the CVM. Just like all parks. There is more to facilities of this nature than profit. Always has been. Like it or not most of these type facilities are publically owned. Cary is about to pick one up soon. Just like Hillsborough did. A private venture gone south. Just like Greensboro got the Sportsplex. I am sorry GSO didnt have a sugar daddy build a huge private pool and then fail as a business. We didnt and we wont.

The arguments about wether we should have this facility are real and legitimate.

Beachwalk

December 3, 2009 - 9:27 pm EST

Mick said "How much moola? I dont really know for sure. "

EXACTLY. And you're willing to risk tax payers money on something you really don't know enough about. But yet you wouldn't be willing to gamble your own money on the same.

Panacea

December 3, 2009 - 9:57 pm EST

If you can't understand the economic impact study, then your claims that the swim center will benefit Greensboro are not credible.

Mick

December 3, 2009 - 10:27 pm EST

BW, I said "I do not know". Im pretty sure the head of the CVB, most if not all of the council members, the new mayor, the advisory board members, the city attorney, financial director, matt brown and others are quite capable of analyzing the study, studies, figures, etc . The council is where the decision now lies. No one "knows" the actual numbers that would be impossible now wouldnt it? But you dont really care. Even if it brought in 50 million it wouldnt be enough for you? So we can drop that junk as well. I would like more info on direct benefit to The City via sales taxes, hotel taxes, etc. But I do see benefits beyond monetary. Those benefits are not worth it to you. Thats cool.

Pan, B-S and you know it. I gave you first hand info. You choose to ignore it. Not my problem. Does the fact that I most likely couldnt fully understand the study invalidate it? Ive never been to the moon but Im pretty sure it is really there. More info is coming. I am willing to bet that you really dont care though.

Beachwalk

December 4, 2009 - 1:34 pm EST

You just don't get it.
There is NO guarantee this complex will draw a single event. Sure the possibility is pretty good, only until the next city comes along and decides to build a bigger and nicer swim palace. I guess you would be in favor of throwing even more tax payer money in at that point to save the "tourism business"? There really doesn't seem to be any limit you would vote against. $12million was fine, $18+ million hasn't deminished you support. Where is the limit? I'm sorry, this city need jobs and investments that will be more sustaining. Investing the same amount of money in small business would be a much more stable and long term investment for Greensboro. Sports and Entertainment ventures should only be considered during better economic times. It is really ridiculus to even consider it now. And yes I would still probably vote against it again. I'm not a gambler and the city leaders should not be gambling with our tax dollars.

Mick

December 6, 2009 - 8:18 am EST

The additional money is not coming from GSO residents or property taxes. We all have our limits. Im closer than most would believe.

DonMoore

December 3, 2009 - 9:25 am EST

We voted for a Parks and Recreation Department run Pool. Not another facility for the coliseum. Put it back under Parks and Recreation and may be we will all get along.

Mick

December 3, 2009 - 10:05 am EST

I understand the sentiment but we will still have much of the cost and operational costs, FAR less income and economic impact and we would have to pay for land (the city may have a suitable site elsewhere that I do not know) and a re-design.

I believe more of us will get along but never all. We would lose supporters as as well gain and then there are those who are against any facility period. Which is of course their right.

Beachwalk

December 3, 2009 - 5:49 pm EST

I am against "any facility" AT THIS TIME. But what I'm really against is the way the old city council hood-winked the citizens.
1. This was a Parks & Rec. Bond. The Parks & Rec. will not be able to have any control over how this pool will be used. The old council knew a Parks & Rec bond would be easier to past than a Coliseum Aquatic Facility bond. Had the council been truthful with the public, the bond never would have pasted in the first place (just as it failed two previous times).
2. This was promoted to be a recreational pool. Anyone who says or thinks it will be a recreational pool is fooling themselves. When was the last time you saw recreational ice skating or recreational basketball at the coliseum?
3. The voters approved $12 million to build a recreational pool. They didn't approve $18+ million for the Matt Brown International Aquatic Swimming and Diving Complex at the Greensboro Coliseum. There is a difference between what the public was led to believe and what in now being presented. Anyone who says different is lying.
4. And the last minute vote of an out going council comes very close to being unethical. If not unethical, then under-handed and reeks to high heaven. If this was such a great plan, then why was the old council afriad the new council might not go along with it? Basically the old council knew they had the votes, but they were not sure how strong the new council would back such a under-handed scheme.

The whole plan needs to be scraped and the new council needs to present to the public in a TRUTHFUL way, what the real plans and intent is for this swimming complex. The bait and switch tactic is as under-handed as it gets. Citizens do not like that type of tactic when buying cars and they hate that type of under-handed scheming even more when dealing with the government.

Mick

December 3, 2009 - 7:20 pm EST

You have voted no every time. So no matter how big you make "AT THIS TIME" it doesnt change your history. You voted no when times were good TWICE! Again that is very much your right and I do respect that.

1 - The ballot language was indeed limited. All the ballots were that way and the eeevill swim community did not write them. I do not disagree with your concept though.

2. The Parks and Rec and private websites were very clear. There were numerous articles in all local papers, LTEs, morning news TV bits, etc. It was "promoted" as a regional competitive three pool complex. This was no secret.

3. I cannot deny the 12 vs 18 vs 20 but the additional funding is not coming from property taxes. It is actually coming from the folks who will benefit the most business wise.

4. Happens all the time. Now the new council has taken ownership and we will all see how it goes. I dont mind the old council finishing what they started and owning up to their decisions.

I respect your conclusion no matter how much I disagree with your path.

Beachwalk

December 3, 2009 - 9:38 pm EST

Yes it is true I have voted against this every time. When time were better and when times were worst. The economy in only one of many, many many reason to vote against this boondoggle. There are more reasons now than ever. But I'll bet you voted for it 3 different times with no regard to anything except your own selfish motive of not having to go out of town for your kids swim meets. Which is fine. But you cannot sit there and tell me this has been handled in a proper way. Even some on your side are realizing that now.
And the old council DID NOT own up to their decision. They did a last minute vote and got the hell out of dodge, thinking they had gotten away with it. Thank God the new council saw through the smoke and mirrors. Hopefully they will present the true facts to the citizens and let them decide based on the new information.

Mick

December 3, 2009 - 10:56 pm EST

Ive said there were pieces of this I didnt like. And I have also said I want this facility for a variety of reasons. Ive said I voted YES when I didnt have a swimmer which blows your "selfish reasons" all to crap. Ive also said I didnt live in the city second time. You do read the info folks provide right? Ive said my kid may well not ever swim in the thing even if it does get started soon which also blows your selfish reasons all to crap. The selfish reasons BS is just that.

Beachwalk

December 4, 2009 - 1:00 pm EST

ZOOM, right over your head.
I don't care why you voted for this boondoggle. I could care less if you voted for selfish reasons or not. You do read the info folks provide right? I said if you voted for selfish reasons that is "fine".
My main point (which went right over you head) was "you cannot sit there and tell me this has been handled in a proper way. Even some on your side are realizing that now."

Mick

December 6, 2009 - 8:19 am EST

"Ive said there were pieces of this I didnt like"

Miss that part?

Persevere

December 3, 2009 - 10:10 am EST

If we take a look at the new aquatics center (Triangle Aquatics Center) in Cary that was built with the same intentions we can learn from their mistakes. It’s just not the right time to be building this in Greensboro. Maybe before the economic meltdown but then we’d probably be in the same boat as Cary’s pool. http://triangle.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2009/05/11/story6.html

fisher

December 3, 2009 - 10:57 am EST

Have you been to the pool in Cary, or are you just commenting blindly? The pool in Cary is a great training facility, but the design was shortsighted in regards to hosting competitions. There is not enough spectator seating. The parking lot is way too small. There are no diving boards. The corners they cut in building that place have come back to haunt them.

Mick

December 3, 2009 - 10:27 am EST

This illustrates why most facilities of this nature and CVMs and Auditoriums and Parks are municipally owned. They do not make good private businesses. No one has ever argued that (except opponents). There is much more to these types of facilities than the bottom line.

Good luck to all and have a good Christmas and Holiday season.

Beachwalk

December 3, 2009 - 5:54 pm EST

The bottom line is, the old council hood-winked the citizens. That is why the old council didn't present this plan as a "facility of this nature". They knew if they had it would have never pasted.

ryanshell

December 3, 2009 - 11:55 am EST

Is there a cost breakdown of the project online anywhere? I'd be interested to see exactly how much the structure was estimated to cost.

Ryan Shell

eMail Updates

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Featured Ads

Search

Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us

News & Record Network Sites

User Tools

  • Mobile
  • Social
  • RSS
  • Share
  • Sign in to MyNR

Search