CAÑON CITY — When voters delivered a mixed decision on building a new pool in town, they created a dilemma: build it without the assurance of having the money to operate it or walk away from the project despite voters’ approval of the sales tax and debt to build it.
There’s a hedge-your-bets option as well, which would slow the construction process so the district could go back to voters again to ask for funds to operate the pool before significant debt is incurred building it.
The only option without financial risk is to bag the project.
That is not the path the Cañon City Area Metropolitan Recreation and Park District and the city are likely to take after a pair of post-election meetings that inched construction of the pool forward.
The citizens who attended and spoke at those meetings urged the district and the city to be bold.
“It would be silly to do anything other than build this,” Adam Arnold, chairman of the Fremont County Tourism Council, said at a special meeting Nov. 19 of the Recreation District board. “If you hold off, you will never build it.
“This community needs to see progress.”
Several others echoed his sentiments and pledged to help the district find a way to pay for operating the pool. Some argued that not building a pool would negatively impact the region’s overall economic well being.
Kyle Horne, executive director of the district, estimated that pool operations would cost $730,000 a year. The pool would bring in about $400,000 a year, leaving a shortfall of about $330,000.
In its last summer, the cost of running the R.C. Icabone pool, which closed in 2o23, was $130,000 for less than three months. The new pool would have a year-round indoor pool as well as outdoor facilities in the summer months.
“We’ll figure it out,” was the refrain at the meeting last week, and the crowd of about 35 cheered and loudly applauded when district board member Andy Palmasano said, “I don’t see number one (no pool) being an option.”
The four other board members agreed.
Still, the obstacles and tough choices loomed large.
The vote
The 115-square-mile recreation district serves about 28,000 Fremont County residents of all ages, including people living in Cañon City.
After weeks of surveys, public meetings and feasibility studies, the district, in conjunction with the city, came up with a plan to finance construction of a $24.8 million pool through a 0.30% city sales tax. That issue went before residents of the city only in November and passed 53.47% to 46.53%.
Two other questions were decided by the entire Recreation District. Voters narrowly approved giving the district permission to incur the debt that would be repaid by the city sales tax, 50.3% to 49.7%. Just 89 votes pushed it to approval.
The second question, to increase property taxes by four mills, failed, 51.85% to 48.15%. That money would have gone into the district’s coffers to cover operational expenses for the pool and other programs. Four mills is about $80 a year more in property taxes on a $300,000 home; it was expected to generate up to about $1.15 million annually.
The district has not had an increase in its mill levy since its inception in 1965 and is the second lowest funded district in the state, at $39.78 per capita. One of the closest demographically is in Montrose, where per capital funding is $109.90.
The votes left the district with money to build a pool, but no money to operate it.
While the district has a bit of time to decide whether it will plunge into the design and construction of the pool, some decisions had to be made quickly.
Cañon City’s city council voted unanimously on Nov. 18 to make the necessary changes to begin collecting the 0.3% sales tax (30 cents on every $100 spent) on Jan. 1. The tax will sunset on Dec. 31, 2050. The council must have a second reading and approval of that ordinance for it to go into effect. That vote is slated for Dec. 2.
Several people spoke in favor of moving forward with pool construction, including two children who pledged to donate 75% of the profits from their hot cocoa stand for pool operations.
“We’re all in favor of it,” Mayor Preston Troutman told the audience. “We just have to see how to get there and blow it across the finish line.”
The sales tax is expected to generate $1.68 million annually and the money will be channeled into a special account for pool construction.
The recreation district board, meanwhile, unanimously approved adding $20,000 to its budget in case it decides to seek another tax increase in the November 2025 election. Its budget must be approved in December, so the board wanted to have that money set aside.
The city and district also must finalize an intergovernmental agreement in the next couple of months.
The risks
The split vote created a few immediate challenges:
- A $1 million donation from the D.W. Biggerstaff Charitable Giving Fund, to be paid at the rate of $100,000 a year for 10 years, was contingent on the passage of all three measures, according to a release. The status of the donation is unclear. Biggerstaff was a former president and CEO of Fremont National Bank and helped bring a Pueblo Community College campus to Fremont County. He died in 2005.
- The $100,000 Fremont County commissioners voted to kick in from the county’s American Rescue Plan Act funds. Work done with that money must be under contract by the end of 2025.
- The district might have a lower bond rating, and hence higher interest rate, on bonds sold to finance the pool because the money to operate the pool was not approved.
- Delaying construction, even by six months, could mean higher construction costs.
- The uncertainty of funding makes the district a less competitive finalist for a $1.25 million grant from Colorado Parks and Wildlife, Horne said.
- If the city collects the sales tax and the district does not build a pool, the city must go to voters to determine what to do with the money.
- District voters rejected four previous ballot questions to repair or replace the Icabone pool before it was permanently closed in the spring of 2023 because of torn lines, cracks and failing systems. The district was criticized for adding other amenities, such as a recreation center, in those ballot questions.
- The state has continued to tinker with how property taxes are levied as home values have skyrocketed in much of the state, which makes it difficult for local governments to know how things might shake out in coming years.
The bond issue that failed included general operations funding for programs other than the pool, something Horne and the district board said is badly needed to maintain low-cost programs for the community.
But if the board decides to once again ask for a mill levy increase, it could consider something less than 4 mills. Board members threw out various options, including delaying a new vote until 2026.
☀️ READ MORE
Horne estimated that it would take 1.5 to 2 mills for pool operations, depending on how the tax rate is set. Two mills would generate up to $575,000.
The board would not have to decide whether to ask for a mill levy increase until this summer.
Board member Melissa Smeins noted that $350,000 a year for operating the pool would be one third of the district’s budget.
“I want to move forward, but how can we be responsible and do this?” she asked.
Horne also noted the risk to the district as he laid out the options.
“We would not be able to operate if there was no mill levy increase by 2030 – the district would be bankrupt,” he said.
After the meeting, Horne said he was surprised that no naysayers spoke at the meeting.
“I have not had a negative call. I have not had a negative email,” he said, noting that there have been negative comments on some social media sites.
He also expected a more reserved approach from those who support the pool because they understand there is a risk in moving forward quickly.
“I do not want to put the financial future of the district in jeopardy,” he said. “We have to be strategic and represent all of the citizens. We did hear from a vocal and proud crowd. I would like to hear from all sides.”