Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Pool meeting: second two (of four) vendor proposals

The second and final evening of discussion was held with the vendors of permanent structures for the pool. Here's a pic from the meeting:

The two proposals tonight were priced at about $4,900,000 (+ $600,000 for a cogeneration system) and $4,100,000. Both of tonight's proposals were interesting.

There were many numbers flying around, including whether all vendors were using consistent numbers with regard to the cost avoidance of the bubble going up and coming down every year. But if I calculated the numbers correctly in my head... then we're looking at a payback on the various proposals as:

1) 20 to 25 years - the $4,100,000 proposal (limited windows)
2) 30 years - the Open-Aire structure for $5,100,000
3) 35 years - the $5,500,000 ($4.9m + $600k)

And I'm not particularly interested in even considering the other proposal. They just didn't impress me with their proposal... though I'm sure they do fine work.

Another thought to keep in mind is that some vendors and residents argue that a permanent structure will increase winter revenue. But by the same token, a permanent structure may decrease summer revenue. So until I hear more details, I'm going to assume revenue stays flat if any permanent structure is erected.

I think it's worth noting that of the four presentations, they were attended by five Council members:

Matt Altieri
Tom Ruocco
Jimmy Sima
Tim Slocum

Cameo appearances were made by Matt Hall and Mike Ecke. Council candidates Sylvia Nichols and Anne Giddings also attended all or some of the presentations.

Considering that the pool is the single biggest concern of the voters, I wish more candidates had attended. But hey, that's just me.

And here's the wrap of the presentations by Councilman Altieri:

Tim White


Anonymous said...

Did Dill and DeCaprio not feel it is necessary?
This has to be the single most important topic going into the election. We need to figure out how the pool should be managed, repaired, and fixed. We are talking millions of dollars and members of our TC and those running don't feel it is important enough to show up??How will they answer the residents questions about it as they go around campaigning?

$5 Million is an awful lot of money.

I still haven't heard anyone tell me how much the town will have to continue to contribute, especially if we proceed with a permanent structure. If we have to continue to give $500,000 or more per year, then I say forget it.

Are they over estimating the amount of residents that would become members? I am sure if they enclose it they will lose more than they gain from the summer members.

Stop the madness!

Anonymous said...

Anon 12;17,,,,why was the North Haven pool built in a concrete building? Maybe they knew something you didn't?

Given that the construction costs of all these options seem pretty mcuh the same, the real questions ought to be a) operating expense and b)customer appeal.

Anonymous said...

What was it about the second proposal you did not like? Those of us with famlies that could not make the meeting only know about 3 of the ideas now. Thanks Tim. Looks like the plan you are against will not get mentioned in an attempt to make it go away. Kind of the opposite of transparent government, isn't it?

Anonymous said...

does it make a difference? Just throwing good money after bad.....

Anonymous said...

7:59 AM
Why do you think they have committees to discuss these things?

It was very transparent by allowing them to come with a proposal to the meeting, explain how it isn't?
The committee needs to weed through the proposals and see which one(s) they will bring to the community. I certainly wouldn't want all the residents picking which one is the best.

As for those with familiues not making the meeting, all I can say is if it is that important to you, find a babysitter. Why have a committtee if they allow all proposals to pass through?

Again I ask, what will the costs to the town be if after we put a permanent structure for upkeep and energy?
Will the membership increase or decrease?

It may be worth while finding an independent company to operate it.

Transparency is there!

Anonymous said...

I can understand people not being able to make these pool meetings especially since there's an open house every other night at the schools. I wonder how many even knew about the pool meetings. If you didn't watch the last meeting or two of the council, you'd never be aware of them.
Hopefully the meetings were taped and will be shown several times on channel 14.

Anonymous said...

The pool may be the single biggest issue with the voters, but the voters should also be concerned about the costs connected with the turf that's being pushed through.

Recap of the boe meeting tonight -
Turf field will likely cost 825K.
May need to spend more to address wiring issues at field.
Will cost approx 600K to replace in 8 - 10 years.
May want to purchase separate insurance to cover vandalism.
May want to redirect money in capital budget to help cover costs.
May want to set up an account in the budget with 78K set aside annually to go towards replacement.
The $150K currently in C.B. to resurface the track isn't enough to cover actual resurfacing costs.
Can't wear spike heels on turf.
Probably won't use turf in July or August between 10 & 2 because of heat issues; yet we'll supposedly be able to have well over 300 events per year on it.
May look to get funds from the town's gift account if fundraising doesn't cover add'l costs.

And the list goes on.

BTW - Due to budget constraints, the schools were not able to set up at the fall festival to hand out pencils. Due to budget constraints, we have 15 - 18 less teaching positions. Due to budget constraints, the cleaning service no longer cleans the schools daily - only twice a week now.

What's wrong with this picture???