Hello Menlo Park City Council Members,
It’s very disappointing that the recent petition foraquatics operator financial transparency was misinformed and therefore misleading:
1) The petition claims to “gifting” the operatoradditional public funds in return for reduced hours and programs at Belle Haven
a. This is false – the operator requests additionalfunds to maintain the current 63 hours and programs at both pools
2) The petition claims that the operator has notoffered “any meaningful financial disclosures despite the City Council’srepeated requests”
a. This also is false
i. The operator has continued to provide quarterlyand annual financial disclosures in full compliance with the agreement
ii. Earlier this year the city retained anindependent “qualified government finance consultant” who verified that “the operator’sfinancial statements are true and accurate and that the operator’s internalcontrols and financial accounting practices are sound and consistent withGAAP” (quoted from the city staff report).
iii. The amount of financial information the operatorprovides the city dwarfs that provided by the operator to other cities where itmanages aquatics facilities
It’s very sad that Menlo Park residents were misled in thismanner – and especially at this late stage in the process.
However, the city has known of the operators financial shortfall for almost a yearand we are now at a crossroads. At thelast City Council meeting, the operator stated that they are prepared toterminate the agreement if they aren’t provided the financial support needed tomake ends meet.
The city staff has proposed an amendment to the contractthat will keep both pools operating with the wonderful programming we’ve cometo expect. This will continue tomaximize the public good that both pools bring to the community.
A vote against the amendment means that both pools will getshut down for many months while the city tries to figure out how to re-openthem.
Meanwhile the programming and swimmers will shift to theRinconada pool next door in Palo Alto – which also happens to be run by theoperator but in a city that has managed to keep it’s pool open.
We would much rather support the pools in our city - we urgeyou to approve the amendment to resolve this issue for the continued public enjoyment of both our beautiful pools.
Regards
Bob HubbellDana Shields1231 Woodland Avenue
Menlo Park, CA 9402530 year Menlo Park residents
