It's Your Money

Your taxpayers’ Association has received a number of negative comments about the proposed new Martin County Aquatics Center. These comments cover a number of areas including the cost, requirement, maintenance and contracting of the facility. To discuss these issues we need to recap how we got where we are.

Back in 2006 your Taxpayers’ Association Board was almost evenly split on whether to support the ½ cent 5 year sales tax increase referendum that was then on the November ballot. The proposed increase was “estimated to raise $60,000,000 or about $12,000,000 per year. The Committee claims that the money raised can, and will, be used to match grants and other sources of money so as to leverage the money collected from Martin County citizens and tourists as previous sales tax initiatives have done”.

We publicly indicated that while we were against any tax increase we supported many of the objectives presented by the “Citizens for Conservation and Parks” especially a replacement community pool for the County facility scheduled to close at Martin County High School. At the time the proposed facility was described to voters as a “$12 million dollar aquatics center to be built on the YMCA property owned by Martin County on Monterey Road”.

County voters approved the tax by a large margin, monies have been collected since January 1, 2007 and pre-construction tasks for an aquatics center have begun. Since that vote many things have changed. The most obvious is the economy. In 2006 we reached the peak of the housing bubble and tax revenue of all types was increasing. The decision to close the High School pool was reconsidered in 2008 and it will apparently be funded and maintained for the foreseeable future. The proposed center is now planned as a completely new complex on County property East of the Sheriff and MC Building Department compounds off Willoughby Road. The new plan currently has the following projected amenities:

Pools:
1. 50 meter x 25 yard competition pool with an integral diving well

2. 25 yard x 15 yard exercise and learn to swim pool

3. Outdoor Leisure pool
a. Zero-Depth entry activity pool

(approx. 7,000 square feet – nominal 70’ x 100’)
b. Water play structure with dumping bucket
c. Lazy river (approx. 750 linear feet x 11 feet wide)
d. Enclosed 40 foot high, 2 flume body slide w/ tower

4. Pool deck and associated improvements

 Support Facilities (sized based on capacities of aquatic facilities)

5. Buildings
a. Food and beverage concession
b. Party rooms
c. Admin spaces
d. Men’s, women’s and family changing/restroom locker rooms
e. Support spaces

6. Pool equipment Area

7. Parking and site improvements

8. Landscaping and Irrigation

At this point we continue to support building the aquatic complex with some significant caveats. We do this because:

The voters approved the referendum with this center prominently featured as a main reason for approval.

1. Building costs have drastically decreased and the total cost for this facility is now anticipated to be approximately $8,000,000 or about 2/3 of that presented to voters in 2006.
2. Even though the ½ cent tax has not yielded the expected revenue it has accumulated enough to meet the new reduced cost.
3. In hard economic times a facility such as this will be a major attraction for residents/families needing economic recreation.
4. The facility COULD become a revenue generator by hosting aquatic competitions.

Our major reservation is in how the contracting for building this facility is being handled. We understand that in first round of evaluation all of the local General Contractors bidding on this facility have been eliminated. In today’s economic environment the County policy of “local preference” should be more than a politically expedient statement. Obviously we are against waste and for competent contractors doing public work. However, it is hard for us to believe that there are no local contractors, when backed with appropriate sub-contractors, that can even make it past the first cut. Before proceeding further, we want the staff making these decisions to clearly explain why nobody in our County is qualified to do this particular County work. We need jobs and the contractors that bid and were eliminated are all local taxpayers