Should USMS own its own pools?

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

Michael Heather — Sat, 13 Jun 2020 03:11:07 GMT

FWIW, local health authorities have jurisdiction over member subscription pools in a great many places. Furthermore, this decision would presumably not be made by an individual, but rather a board, and we've seen here that opinions on this matter vary pretty greatly. Anecdotally, I left Gold's Gym after 14 years because they refused to open the pool, despite being given the "all clear" from the state and local health department, so depending on the local organizations leanings, it would actually make the problem worse, rather than better. The current problems are being foisted on pools by the CDC "guidelines" as interpreted by risk assessment and/or a city manager who could not care one bit about swimming, because golf is his only sport of choice. A private pool only needs to pass safety and health code regulations (along with inspections).

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

67King — Fri, 12 Jun 2020 06:09:04 GMT

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

Michael Heather — Fri, 12 Jun 2020 01:07:22 GMT

After reading about the incredibly stringent rules for reopening pools in California (reservations, SD, maps of traffic flow, 2 per lane, etc.), it is now obvious and apparent that USMS should in fact own pools across the country. The simplest way to avoid the burdensome city or county rules is to have a private subscription to join the pool(s) and keep the politics as far away as possible.

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

Linda Chapman — Thu, 30 Apr 2020 02:23:09 GMT

Our pool (circa 1971, 6 lanes, ~42yd with a bulkhead) has been managed since 2009 by the USA-S team that has swum there for years. Pool is still "owned" by school district, but USA-S team takes on the risk and responsibility of running. Team runs two other pools as well. It takes a variety of programming to run in the black. Swim lessons - small classes - are a HUGE part of making the whole thing pencil out. Pool time is expensive here bc there isn't any subsidy from a city or county. Example: our masters team dues are $120/month. Takes a very dedicated volunteer Operating Board to keep the pools running. There is a paid exec besides all the paid pool staff. During HS season pool is used from 5am to 10pm (a few dead hours in there). Masters get 6 lanes at 6am (after HS) and 3 lanes at noon. USA-S team has staggered workouts 7 days a week. Lessons are usually 4 students per class. Each class is weekly, so there are a LOT of people signed up for classes at any one time. Newer pool configurations have rec pools which generally support the lap pool as the lessons do in our pools. A lap pool, by itself, usually can't run in the black. Could be different for an outdoor pool in a warm area. Team could likely profitably operate a modern 50m facility, with separate teaching pool, but we have been unable to get any sort of ballot measure passed to build one.

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

Former Member — Wed, 29 Apr 2020 15:06:44 GMT

Orca: USMS has money which is currently invested in conservative vehicles, waiting for an opportunity like this. The last number I remember is about $3-5 million. After the covid it may be down, but will rebound. Are you suggesting that USMS spend their 'rainy day fund' to subsidize the operation and maintenance of swimming pools in order to create greater pool availability for members? This sounds like the prelude to a sizable increase in dues. I'm not against your proposal, per se, it just seems like there are a lot of questions to be answered. Also of note, most members do not participate in USMS national events, nor would most members use one, two or three pools that USMS was operating. This might result in some acrimony from membership were dues to be increased in order to support such a venture.

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

Former Member — Wed, 29 Apr 2020 13:04:19 GMT

If you can replicate a situation such as that of the location in Indiana that you mentioned, then I suppose it is possible. But as has already been mentioned here, I think it'll take a nearly around the clock usage of the pool, billable usage, to make things work. Even without capital costs, pools are incredibly expensive to operate. Anyway, this seems like a situation where USMS needs to do some research, talk to some cities/counties/school districts/etc that might be looking for somebody to assume their management and operation, and then run the numbers on how feasible it might be. Until you have some numbers and a proposed budget for a facility being considered, it's all just a bunch of speculation.

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

orca1946 — Wed, 29 Apr 2020 11:53:09 GMT

Dues are not going to pay for a pool. I was wondering if a corporation would subsidize is in this venture.

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

Patrick W. Brundage — Wed, 29 Apr 2020 11:20:22 GMT

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

Michael Heather — Wed, 29 Apr 2020 09:44:22 GMT

USMS needs to do some research, talk to some cities/counties/school districts/etc that might be looking for somebody to assume their management and operation, and then run the numbers on how feasible it might be. Until you have some numbers and a proposed budget for a facility being considered, it's all just a bunch of speculation. Many facility owners do not even consider that anyone on the outside would try to manage or buy a facility. USMS, if it decides to try, would have to approach pools that are known to have troubles- for whatever reason. If the reason is mismanagement or short sighted programming, we might have a match. First, the BoD needs to decide that it wants to go this direction. Probably not going to happen anytime soon, if ever. This project would need a lot of ushering and vision. The upside would be remarkable.

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

Dan Kornblatt — Wed, 29 Apr 2020 09:11:59 GMT

Another interesting take on this would be buying a facility that would also be the annual home to USMS Nationals each year perhaps both SCY and LCM with the addition of a SCM Nationals as well.

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

67King — Wed, 29 Apr 2020 07:38:15 GMT

The title of the thread is misleading, I am sorry for that and cannot change it. The intention is for USMS to possibly manage OR buy existing pools that are underused. It is possible to get a facility for free, if you agree to certain terms. My proposal is based on the idea that USMS will not be foolish enough to agree to just anything or buy a pool in a flood zone, Cartel war zone or on top of a skyscraper. Dues should not be affected at all, because operating money should be provided for by program money at the facility. If it only breaks even, we have won a huge victory in keeping one more pool open. I fully realize that until we operate or own all municipal pools across the country (if one is to dream, one should dream BIG), many members not in proximate driving distance would not have th opportunity to use the pool(s). One of a large number of opportunities would be to install new clubs and new members, neither of which are flooding our rolls in the last 5 years. Now this makes a lot more sense that what you are getting at is more clear. Without upfront capital, operating expenses are probably not all that bad, especially if the pool is in a shared resource facility (e.g. a municipal civic center), where some operating costs would be reduced. I would suggest that perhaps management of teh pool, rather than ownership, would be a better way to go about this. That would have the potential to reduce the cost to the owner, while still allowing the community resource. Team dues could fill in some gaps. I think there may be some opportunity there as municipalities are going away from city run sports leagues to church and other non-profit run ones. Here's an example. City near me in an adjoining county has a pool. It has a bubble on it. An older one. My kids' club team used to use it, first as a 5 day per week satellite pool, then a 2 day a week. This past year, the bubble was reported to have failed, and be irrepairable. We found a structure for a tent, used, for a really small price, I think $40K, and presented it to the city. The said said "no, thanks." All kinds of local high schools started raising funds, and working to try to get the bubble replaced. There may be 6 high schools that use that pool. Eventually, the bubble miraculously worked, and it was put up, albeit a couple of months later than normal. Speculation is that the city didn't want to deal with it. If that speculation is right, then it may be ripe for another entity to take over it.

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

Michael Heather — Wed, 29 Apr 2020 06:52:24 GMT

Dues are not going to pay for a pool. I was wondering if a corporation would subsidize is in this venture. Dues do not pay for the pool. That would be a stupid venture. Our reputation and saved money will negotiate a price for purchase or management of a facility. USMS once threw $75,000 at a tv commercial that never happened. I do not think all of the budgeted money was used, but some was. We got no return for that. Even if we lose some money on a pool, we should pick up a bunch of new swimmers and maybe a new club. Corporate sponsorships are available, but we need to be a membership of over 100,000 to attract that kind of money. We have been losing members for 5 years.

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

Michael Heather — Wed, 29 Apr 2020 06:47:35 GMT

I wholeheartedly agree that there are private organizations that could likely do a much better job of running pools than many public parks & rec departments. But, to do that, you need volume of usage - lots of swim lessons, probably a large USAS team, lap swimming lanes, water aerobics, etc. A USMS team is a nice addition to that volume ... However, even in a great case, I don't imagine you're turning over a huge profit, so I suspect it's a pretty poor investment. If pools were a great investment (beyond hyper-focused and small facilities that only do swim lessons), you'd have private companies popping up around the country to make the business case to municipalities to run their pools. I don't think that's happening in many places because, as much as I love swimming, pools are a community investment in health and not a profit-making venture. I'd love to be proven wrong. Your hypothesis is correct, pools need a lot of programs to make money. There are 24 hours in a day and I am always wondering why cities cannot see that there are plenty of money making opportunities after 9 pm and before 5 am. Not looking for huge profit, break even is good enough for a 501(c)3 corporation. Some profit will of course be welcome, but first we need to try. The BoD has spoken informally about this subject a few times over the years, but nobody wants to be the leader and possible goat if it does not work. In 2006, we (USMS) spent over $125,000 hosting FINA worlds. That was the final tally, after we had fronted over $200,000. I believe we can do better when we are our own bosses. Pools are a huge investment initially, but the continuing costs are only fractional and mostly based on programming. The more programs you have, the more money you have to use. USMS would be buying or managing existing facilities, so construction costs would mostly be moot.

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

Michael Heather — Wed, 29 Apr 2020 06:33:04 GMT

Are you suggesting that USMS spend their 'rainy day fund' to subsidize the operation and maintenance of swimming pools in order to create greater pool availability for members? This sounds like the prelude to a sizable increase in dues. I'm not against your proposal, per se, it just seems like there are a lot of questions to be answered. Also of note, most members do not participate in USMS national events, nor would most members use one, two or three pools that USMS was operating. This might result in some acrimony from membership were dues to be increased in order to support such a venture. The title of the thread is misleading, I am sorry for that and cannot change it. The intention is for USMS to possibly manage OR buy existing pools that are underused. It is possible to get a facility for free, if you agree to certain terms. My proposal is based on the idea that USMS will not be foolish enough to agree to just anything or buy a pool in a flood zone, Cartel war zone or on top of a skyscraper. Dues should not be affected at all, because operating money should be provided for by program money at the facility. If it only breaks even, we have won a huge victory in keeping one more pool open. I fully realize that until we operate or own all municipal pools across the country (if one is to dream, one should dream BIG), many members not in proximate driving distance would not have th opportunity to use the pool(s). One of a large number of opportunities would be to install new clubs and new members, neither of which are flooding our rolls in the last 5 years.

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

Former Member — Tue, 28 Apr 2020 16:27:47 GMT

I'll just add that even in the event that a school district, city or county were to grant a not for profit organization something like a $1/year lease, it's no guarantee that you won't lose money on the endeavor. I was involved as a board member on a swim team where we took over a 2 year old, 8 lane indoor pool, and even with not having to pay for the rent of the facility, we lost money routinely and often relied upon the generosity of our head coach and her family. This took place over 10 years ago now so my memory of details isn't super sharp, but things like utility bills, insurance, employees and maintenance can be truly cumbersome. To be fair, our swim team was relatively small (~120 kids) and there was no masters team to speak of. A few meets were hosted, one of them a masters meet that I ran, but none were large enough to generate significant revenue...if any. A larger pool in a more swimming heavy area might have a slightly different result, but for us it resulted in a lot of red ink. Paul and Laura Smith would probably have some valuable insight into this subject.

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

67King — Tue, 28 Apr 2020 11:17:15 GMT

67King: bubble? Are you kidding? Boulder, CO has an outdoor pool that is open everyday and you can see pictures of people walking through snow to go to workout. Ask Eney Jones, she coaches there. I would bet that indoor pools open every day outnumber outdoor pools open every day 10,000:1, at least anywhere north of I-20. Shoot, there are three 50M pools all next to each other in Knoxville. 2 indoor, 1 outdoor. The outdoor pool is not open most of the year, the other 2 are (well......were anyway) every day.

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

orca1946 — Tue, 28 Apr 2020 10:37:23 GMT

And where would the $$ come from? Would our dues increase to fund this?

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

Michael Heather — Tue, 28 Apr 2020 06:41:38 GMT

To the naysayers: Try to look at the big picture, not just your own. The USMS board and much of its national committee membership have hundreds of years of combined experience and are not likely to agree to an obviously losing prospect. I am also supposing that the program would start small, with one or two likely locations that have enough masters swimmers, divers, synchro, and water polo as well as age group support for most or all the sports. Two workouts per day will not pay the bills, but a selection of programs thoughtfully employed, and well reasoned management, will. Orca: USMS has money which is currently invested in conservative vehicles, waiting for an opportunity like this. The last number I remember is about $3-5 million. After the covid lunacy it may be down, but will rebound. 67King: bubble? Are you kidding? Boulder, CO has an outdoor pool that is open everyday and you can see pictures of people walking through snow to go to workout. Ask Eney Jones, she coaches there.

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

67King — Tue, 28 Apr 2020 03:44:52 GMT

I don't like saying no to something without data, but around here, pools are money losing things. The places taht keep them running are municipalities, the big D1 school, or gyms. And those almost all have other things going on besides just the pools. Even the stand alone pool a couple of hours away has a water park attached to it. If there are outdoor pools that aren't covered, then maybe. But even still, it is about $400,000 to buy a bubble or a tent for one. WIth teh roughly 2 dozen masters swimmers we have around here, I can't see that happening.

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

swoomer — Mon, 27 Apr 2020 11:26:07 GMT

My concern is that there will be inequity this year. Some states will open pools before others. How can we have a national championship if some people canâ€™t swim up until the day of the event. How do we establish top ten rankings when a lot of people arenâ€™t included because of no opportunity to swim? Way more questions then answers.

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

Michael Martin — Mon, 27 Apr 2020 09:41:12 GMT

It's definitely something that should be looked into...

RE: Should USMS own its own pools?

Allen Stark — Mon, 27 Apr 2020 08:48:12 GMT

I don't know if it's practical, but I like the idea.