Simplified: The Sioux Falls City Council on Tuesday discussed setting a hard cap on how much the city can spend to construct a new indoor pool and recreation center in Frank Olson Park. A final vote on the ordinance was deferred to next week, but here's what we know so far.
Why it matters
- The City Council has spent years planning the future of Frank Olson pool, and when plans evolved to include an indoor recreation center with gym space, indoor play and fitness space, controlling the total cost of the project became a priority.
- That's part of why the council set specific guardrails in the ordinance authorizing bonds to fund the new project – capping borrowing at $47 million plus or minus 5% for the recreation center and $68 million total for both the center and a new outdoor pool at Kuehn Park.
- Those caps on the amount the city can borrow do not put specific limits on how much the city can spend in total on the projects.
- That's what councilors looked to solve for in an amendment proposed Tuesday night to a gifting agreement from Jennifer and Joe Kirby, who announced a $1 million gift to support the rec center in exchange for naming rights of the "Kirby Pool at the Frank Olson Recreation Center."
"I want to be very strong and say there is no more flexibility," Councilor Curt Soehl said after bringing an amendment to cap the total spending at no more than $49,350,000 (which is that $47 million plus 5%).
Tell me more
Councilors were very clear and vocal in their gratitude for the Kirbys in making their donation.
The discussion focused instead on the specific guardrails in place to keep the city from spending more than $49,350,000 on the Frank Olson Recreation Center.
Megan Raposa
Finance Director Shawn Prichett advised against the specific cap, arguing that if bids came in at $50 million, for example, the city would have to reject them to comply with this ordinance, if passed.
"Imagine a situation where we set this threshold and a bid comes in at $5,000 more," Pritchett said. "Are we willing to reject the bid? ... You're putting a restraint on the future council."
For Soehl, that's exactly the point.
"Future councils could change that, but as of today, that's the limit," Soehl said.
Other councilors supported Soehl's amendment, which passed 6-2.
"I don't want to be in that situation where w’ere having a conversation about, 'Do we award this bid or not?' when we’re at the finish line on something," Councilor Miranda Basye said before voting to support Soehl's proposed spending cap.
What happens next?
The full ordinance to approve the gifting and naming agreement was deferred to the Feb. 17 meeting, at which point councilors will take final action.
- If the ordinance passes as amended, the spending cap of $49,350,000 will be set.
