Waterloo Citizens for a Pool is hoping next week’s Waterloo Park District Board meeting will mean substantial movement for its cause. 

As WCP President Amy Grandcolas explained, the group needs the park district’s blessing to move forward with the next step in its process: bringing the pool to a public vote. 

In order to get a referendum question on the ballot, a taxing district such as the park district must sponsor it. 

“We honestly are hoping just to see a motion be made for it to go on the June ballot and to engage Stifel, Nicolaus & Company,  to do the ballot referendum, a second for that motion and then a vote,” Grandcolas said. “But, we don’t even know if that will happen.” 

Grandcolas said she believes the community attending the meeting and showing support for WCP can go a long way.

The next park district meeting takes place at 7 p.m. March 9 at Waterloo City Hall.

Grandcolas and Gina Pfund, park district board member and a member of WCP, said pool opponents often point to past ballot referendum failures as a sign the public does not want a pool. Pfund said the community has changed greatly since the last ballot referendum, and the past is not indicative of the future wants of the city. 

“Let’s let the public speak,” Pfund said. “Bring it to a vote.”

WCP is hoping to bring a $4.5 million bond referendum to the June 28 primary election ballot. This figure will cover the building cost of the pool, with a detailed breakdown revealing $65,000 for excavation and landscaping, a 10 percent contingency allotment and $178,000 splash pad contribution. 

According to Stifel’s calculations, a 15-year bond option would mean taxpayers could expect to pay $37.25 more per year for every $100,000 of property value. A 20-year bond option would set this figure at approximately $30.20. 

The park district’s taxing district only includes those within Waterloo city limits, Grandcolas said. 

WCP’s capital campaign will cover operating costs, which Grandcolas said has over $135,000 pledged so far. 

“(The bond referendum footing build costs) allows us to have our capital campaign be more modest and obtainable for this area with a goal of $1.5 million that would go into an endowment fund to cover the operating expenses,” Grandcolas said, adding the campaign will continue well beyond this year. “This would be ongoing. These operating costs will continue to be there year after year, so we’ll continue to work on bringing in funds from the local community to cover those.” 

Waterloo Park District Board Vice President Shelby Mathes said he is skeptical the endowment will cover all operating and maintenance costs and believes these expenses will end up needing to be fronted by taxpayers. 

Mathes worries future maintenance costs will ultimately fall on the park district – something he said is not within its budget. 

“They’re not giving you the full story,” Mathes said. 

He cited Fenton, Mo.’s Riverchase Rec Center operating at an average $517,000 deficit per year and the City of Edwardsville terminating its lease agreement with Southern Illinois University Edwardsville for use of an outdoor pool as foreshadowing the future of city pools. 

“Now there’s so much going on that there’s only going to be a select few using the pool,” Mathes said. 

Yet, Pfund, who went from swimming at Waterloo’s former city pool as a child to eventually becoming its manager, said swim meets and open swim times could attract a wide range of pool goers. 

“We’re always looking for ways to let our town shine. This would be another way to bring people in to explore Waterloo,” Pfund said. 

At a recent park district meeting, park district attorney Mary Buettner explained the process to bring such a referendum to voters. 

“My guesstimate, based on other bond work I’ve done and conversations with people who work in the area, is that the cost could be as much as $30,000 to get the measure on the ballot,” Buettner said in an email. “We would have the numbers run by a firm that does bond work and there would be a small amount of legal work needed to get the measure on the ballot.” 

Tom Crabtree, director of Stifel, explained that putting the referendum on the ballot requires the park district to approve doing so and sending it to the Monroe County clerk. Grandcolas said fees during this time are minimal and may include small filing costs. 

Crabtree said in the municipal bond writing industry, it is common to “run the numbers” at no cost. Should the referendum not pass, his company would not get paid. 

Buettner echoed another concern discussed at the park district’s December meeting: 

“If the estimate is wrong and the tax levy is not sufficient, then we end up with a partially built pool or one that we cannot afford to maintain,” Buettner wrote. “We could go back to the taxpayers at that point and ask for more money, in other words, another tax increase.” 

Grandcolas said WCP has thought through multiple safeguards in this case. 

“The park district and WCP  also have the option to apply for government and private sector grants to cover possible overages or expand the design to include more features,” Grandcolas said “Also, the 10 percent contingency allotment and the capital campaign for the endowment fund are all on the information sheet that was in the packet given to every park board member.” 

Those interested in learning more about WCP can visit waterloopool.com.  

Here, they can also sign up for WCP’s March 19 St. Paddy’s Day 5K Walk and Run. The price for adults (ages 13 and older) are $25 and kids 12 and under cost $20. 

WCP is also distributing yard signs. Those wanting a sign placed in their yard should email waterloocitizensforapool@gmail.com or message the group’s Facebook page. 

“It just shows the commitment and drive that our members have, that they’ll go drive around town for three hours and put up yard signs,” Grandcolas said.