New Operator for Beleagured Proposed Aquatic Center to be Considered by Elk Grove City Council

May 12, 2014 | At Wednesday night's meeting, the Elk Grove City Council will be asked to consider a new operator for the city...


May 12, 2014 |

At Wednesday night's meeting, the Elk Grove City Council will be asked to consider a new operator for the city's proposed aquatic center.

As part of the city's endeavor to bring an Olympic-sized pool and water amusement park, in October, 2013 the city contracted with P3 International to design, build and operate the facility. As part of the agreement, P3 said it would subcontract the operations of the facility to Harvest Family Entertainment.

At the April 23 city council meeting, Elk Grove City Manager Laura Gill announced that Harvest Family had withdrawn from its agreement with P3I International. According to a city staff report, P3I has contracted with S & L Hospitality to operate the facility.

To facilitate the new contract, the city council is being asked to allow P3I 30 to 60 additional days to make their final proposal. The report says "work is progressing; however task deliverable are lagging, for which P3I points to the loss of its subcontractor."

The subcontractor setback is another setback for the proposed facility that Elk Grove Mayor Gary Davis has made a key part of his efforts to transform the city to a tourist destination.  Council Members Steve Detrick and Pat Hume have both stated in council meeting that they will not support the facility if it requires an annual subsidy.

The location of the proposed facility, in the city's undeveloped civic center, has also raised concerns by Hume who said the city ought to consider locating the center's closer to Highway 99. Hume said the civic center location, which would put the facility in a residential neighborhood, might not be well suited because of noise and traffic considerations.

Wednesday night's meeting starts at 6 p.m.    








Post a Comment

14 comments

lynn said...

I find it interesting that the location of the aquatic park becomes an issue only after approving the spending of the 750,000 for what will be another binder of......imo that money could of gone towards road improvements..filled a few potholes. If our leaders would think about...is this the right location for a project, does this improve our city and benefit the surrounding neighborhoods, does this improve visual appearance of our city, would I live near this, would I live in this neighborhood, would I live near propane tanks,... I wonder do our leaders consider such questions.

Capt. Benjamin L. Willard said...

"work is progressing; however task deliverable are lagging, for which P3I points to the loss of its subcontractor."

Let me translate "task deliverables are lagging" - P3I missed the deadlines.

Ms. Craig, please use plain English. You seem to be a knowledgeable bean counter, but this is double talk that makes you look like you are trying to hide something. Perhaps you are.

Anonymous said...

Sensible people had assumed this project was on a fast track to elimination after the last developer pulled out. It is simple economics...if this project were profitable, the private sector would be lining up to invest. It is obvious to most that this is a money loser from the get go and we need to be reasonable about this. Yes, 700,000 has been wasted on a feasibility study that any citizen here in EG could have told you....this project is NOT feasible. Stop throwing good money after bad. Gill...stop this madness....go back to plain old soccer fields for kids and young adults. That could at least pay for itself with tournament fees and concessions and/or parking fees.

Connie said...

I hope this company been properly vetted by staff and that they called other cities who do business with them.

Love Boat said...

It will cost around a $100 for a family of four to slide and who knows how much to jump off that special high-dive. No thanks, I'll just buy a slip n slide and a tot pool at Walmart. Keep your destination toys.

Anonymous said...

Per EGCC Agenda..."S & L is currently engaged in a large project in Goddard, Kansas, that is constructing competitive aquatics facilities, a hotel and a conference center. Staff is confident that S & L Hospitality is qualified to operate the City’s proposed facilities."

Having read many pages and the latest being the
Minutes of their City Council meeting on April 21st, I see no mention of the name S & L Hospitality. Has anyone spoke with Goddard Destination Development, Inc., the builder of this project? In fact on this date they just cleared the way for the next phase. News article here....
http://ksn.com/2014/04/21/goddard-city-council-passes-aquatic-complex-cleared-for-next-phase/

Anonymous said...

Octopus Civic Center Design

Major League Soccer Stadium

Vacant Mall

Senior Housing in close proximity to huge propane facility.

Operator who is building in another destination city, Goddard Kansas!

Sister city relationship with capital city of the Kingdom of Zamunda.

Anonymous said...

Correct me if I am wrong, I recall that the city will be dumping $13 million on top of the $750 K that has already been committed.

Anonymous said...

Do I understand that we are still going ahead with constructing a Competitive Aquatics Facility, Commercial Recreational Park, ancillary facilities and parking on approximately twenty acres in Civic Park? It seems to me our City Council & Staff need to rethink this whole project. None of this fits the location selected and extending the contract is just a total waste of time and money that could certainly be put to a better use.

You can read about the corporation here. Seems they are also based in Dallas, TX...how about that Mayor Davis? TX has come to little EG!

http://www.slhosp.com/

Anonymous said...

I have a few questions:
why is "staff" making decisions on this contract and not the council? Per this story, "staff" is recommending a new subcontractor (S&L) however, the original subcontractor was approved by the council after much debate and consideration.
My next concern is this new subcontractor did not seek out this project....we (staff) went after them. This should be a red flag. If the company did not originally bid for the project, perhaps this project is not something they were interested in. Yet our staff felt it was appropriate to unilaterally make them part of the project? How much more time and money and effort will be needed to bring them up to speed and who pays for that additional money? I doubt P3I will be offering any financial consideration. The city will be asked to invest more resources without any degree of ultimate progress. This project seems to be off track.

Anonymous said...

I have a few questions:
why is "staff" making decisions on this contract and not the council? Per this story, "staff" is recommending a new subcontractor (S&L) however, the original subcontractor was approved by the council after much debate and consideration.
My next concern is this new subcontractor did not seek out this project....we (staff) went after them. This should be a red flag. If the company did not originally bid for the project, perhaps this project is not something they were interested in. Yet our staff felt it was appropriate to unilaterally make them part of the project? How much more time and money and effort will be needed to bring them up to speed and who pays for that additional money? I doubt P3I will be offering any financial consideration. The city will be asked to invest more resources without any degree of ultimate progress. This project seems to be off track.

Anonymous said...

Let's not forget that Southgate is building a competing pool facility right near a large portion of Elk Grove's population. The more this thing advances, the more it looks to be a big money drain. I hope Detrick and Hume have the courage to stare down the mayor on this boondoggle and put a stake it its heart.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps the other operators knew about Southgate, unlike some others 'round e.g. city hall??

Anonymous said...

It seems the City Council needs to rethink this whole project. The Water Amusement Park should be thrown out for sure and tread very carefully on the Aquatics Center...relocate for sure and hopefully they have done their homework on how this Southgate facility could serve the needs of the EG swim teams. Packing the house with teens wanting this facility does not serve the taxpayers....listened to my teens and we would be bankrupt by now. This would most likely entail Bonds that we would be paying on for years and does nothing to balance the jobs to housing problem.

As for an Olympic Aquatics Center...have those requirements/regulations been vetted? They are very strict!

Follow Us

Popular

Archives

Corrections




item