An intergovernmental agreement between the city of Grand Junction and School District 51 will keep the Orchard Mesa Pool open for at least the next two years if approved by both entities next month.
The Grand Junction City Council discussed the proposed agreement at its Wednesday meeting. The council supported the agreement in principle, which would see the city pay 100% of the costs of operating the facility while the county retains ownership. Previously, the city shared operating costs with Mesa County and D51 paid utilities.
Part of the agreement discussed by council members was a plan by the city and school district to provide funds for the future demolition of the pool building. Mayor Abe Herman said the district was concerned about delaying demolition because of rising costs. The city will provide $200,000 as part of the agreement to cover those costs, he said.
“If demolition occurs (in 2026) and the cost is less than the escrow amount, county funds will be used first and then city funds,” Herman said. “Anything left over will be returned to the city.”
Councilman Dennis Simpson expressed concern that setting aside this money might not be consistent with rules that dictate how the City Council allocates future city funds. City Attorney John Shaver said he does not believe this is a problem.
Herman said that while the agreement discusses the possibility of future demolition of the community pool, it is not the only option the city is considering.
“It gives us some time to think about other options,” Herman said. “One possibility is that we decide to take it over and do something with it. The IGA is considering that. Another option that I think some of us have expressed interest in and that I’m particularly interested in is the possibility of creating a recreation district.”
Council member Randall Reitz expressed his joy that the city will be able to keep the swimming pool open to the public for at least the next two years.
“I know we guarantee it will stay open for the next two years,” Reitz said. “I’m confident that in the meantime we can find a way to keep it open for the foreseeable future. I think that will require some creativity on our part and partnerships with other important groups, but there’s nothing stopping us from doing that.”
Herman said the city might consider putting a question on the ballot next November asking voters to create a recreation district that could fund needed improvements to the pool facility. It’s too late to ask voters this year, he said.
“To me, that’s attractive because the particular challenge it solves is that 50% of the users of that facility are county residents, not city residents,” Herman said. “It would create a mechanism for all users to share the cost of the facility, rather than it being passed on entirely to city residents while also serving non-city residents.”
Both the City Council and the D51 Board of Education are expected to vote on whether to accept the agreement at their respective meetings in early September.
