Wednesday, November 19, 2008

Another $45,000 spent on the pool

The MRJs Jesse Buchanan reports on the continued unnecessary spending at the pool:

While some projects in this year's capital budget are on hold due to uncertainty about the state and town budgets...

The roof will receive $45,000 worth of improvements to combat leaking and other problems associated with the pool - issues that the town has been battling for years.

"We've tried to deal with them incrementally as we could afford to deal with them," said

I wonder how much money has actually been spent for the perpetual reconstruction of the pool?

"When you have a pitched roof that connects to a flat roof, we have a problem," (staff) said. "We can fight the flat roof forever and it still has the inherent problem."

Staff are doing their job. They've been dealt a bad hand.

The failure here is in leadership. This Council wants to ignore the pool at all costs... including this $45,000 repair job.

As for my alternative, I say it becomes a summer-only facility or gets an energy-efficient utilitarian structure with a rapid payback. Too bad the Council majority spends all their time looking for bureaucratic support instead of bipartisan support.

Tim White


Anonymous said...

I thought this was fixed?? Why not have a good engineering firm come up with a solution before we spend money for more leaks?

Anonymous said...

What is going on with the Pool committee? Hve they gone over to turf now and are neglecting the pool?
Can't wait for them to find something better than the turf so they can neglect that and instead of replacing it in 8-10 years we will be replacing it in 5 years.

Anonymous said...

Watching a council meeting from a few weeks ago it was reported by Bill Kunde the engineering from Salamone stated 10 years ago not to use a barrel shaped roof as it would lead to leaks. The report also said not to use a bubble because of high humidity and waste of energy. It was also stated in the report the installer of the bubble said they had never installed a bubble in this climate but humidity would not be a problem. So what have we missed?