Aquatics Assessment ReportCollege Station City Council

Parks & Recreation Department

David Schmitz, Director

Amy Atkins, Assistant Director

Kelly Kelbly, Recreation Manager

January 8, 2015

Assessment Objective

• Conduct an assessment of aquatic facilities and programs

• Identify efficiency lapses

• Recommend improvements necessary for the delivery of a comprehensive and financially sustainable aquatic program.

Facility Inspection Approach

• Third Party inspection – scope of work

• Commercial Swim Management – no vested interest

• Viewed three City pools in off-season

Facility Inspection

Cindy Hallaran Pool

• Antiquated chemical controller

– Replace

• Water seepage at wall

– Full leak detection required

Facility Inspection

Thomas Pool

• Antiquated chemical controller

– Replace

• Bathhouse – non-ADA compliant

– Demolition and rebuild

• Leak at gutter seam

– Remove portion of deck, replace

Facility Inspection

Adamson Lagoon

• Antiquated chemical controllers

– Replace

• Slide Structure

– Replace areas of weakened aluminum, sandblast and repaint structural supports

Identifying Efficiencies

Approach identified:

• Staffing & Scheduling

• Hours & Attendance

• Chemicals & Maintenance

• Programming

• Resulting Subsidy

Cindy Hallaran Pool

Revenue CostsCost to operate: $177,140

Revenue:

$58,265

22,533 attendees

67% subsidy

Thomas Pool

Costs

Low attendance

Extreme

Subsidy

Cost to operate:

$151,741

Revenue:

$27,815

1,000 attendees (general public)

82% subsidy

Adamson Lagoon

Low Subsidy

High Revenues

Well attended

Cost to operate:

$307,252

Revenue:

$232,342

34,353 attendees

24% subsidy

CSMS Natatorium

CSISD Facility

City Operational

Costs

High subsidy

Budget:

$64,182

Cost to Operate:

$86,900

Revenue:

$32,828

62% Subsidy

Management Options

Option overview:

• City continues O &M with efficiencies

• Outsourcing of Maintenance and Chemicals

• Full Outsourcing of Aquatics O & M

City Continued O & M

Proposed cost reduction measures

• Chemicals

• Thomas Pool

• CSISD Natatorium

• Staffing

$700,000 | Approximate savings of $350,000*

*based on current budget

Outsource Maintenance

Maintenance to include

• Chemicals

• Controller monitoring & calibration

• Minor repairs

$630,000 | Approximate savings of $425,000*

*based on current budget

Outsource O & M

Services include

• Staffing & Programming

• Daily Maintenance & Chemicals

• 90% revenue to City

• 4.2% subsidy

$474,000 | Approximate savings of $580,000**based on current budget

Options Comparative

$0 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000 $1,000,000 $1,200,000

Current Budget

City Management of all O&M

City MaintainedOperations/Outsourced Maintenance

Outsourcing of all Aquatics O&M

Recommendations

CSISD Natatorium ILA

• No city programming

• Exit strategy

– Notify CSISD immediately

– Continue support through August 31, 2015

Recommendations

Pursue O & M Management Contract

• Positive collateral impact to multiple city departments

– Payroll, Legal, Human Resources, Parks & Recreation

• Implementation Timeline

– Begin RFP process now, contract by Oct. 1, 2015

Recommendations

Thomas Pool long-term

• Extensive renovations or possible demolition

• Add/replace with Sprayground

Spraygrounds

• Savings utilized to construct 1 per year over 4 years

Questions & Discussion