Before the pool operation issue came up Lee Duboc had already demonstrated that she was acting in the best interests of the City when she became the swing vote to vote against the a 50-meter pool. Nicholas Jellins and Chuck Kinney were for it and Mickie Winkler and Paul Collacchi were against it. The extra construction costs plus the higher recurring costs caused Lee to vote against the 50-meter pool. For this fiscally prudent decision she was excoriated by many of her close friends who were members of Menlo Masters, a group run by Tim Sheeper.

When the operations contract for the now rebuilt Burgess Pool complex came up the City had no experienced personnel to operate the pool since they had either voluntarily left the City’s employ or were laid off during the pool’s 2-year reconstruction. Also, with the city facing projected budget deficits, the $500,000 per year recurring cost of the pool’s operation and programs was something that over 70% of the city’s residents who responded to the scientific poll, that was part of the “Your City/Your Decision” process, were willing to forego.

The City Council was actually discussing the possibility of NOT opening the new pool complex. Tim Sheeper, who was no friend of Lee’s, approached the City Council (during a public meeting) to see if they would be interested in having him operate the pool. His fees would come from the pools’ users and the City would have no financial exposure. Mr. Sheeper offered to cover ALL maintenance costs as well.

So, instead of operating the pool at a $500,000 loss, the city would have a well-run, fully operational aquatics program at ZERO cost to the City. The City Council instructed the city staff to run this proposal by the Parks and Recreation Commission, of which Heyward Robinson and Richard Cline were members. The Parks and Recreation Commission performed its due diligence and heard nothing but glowing accolades from people who were previously enrolled in other Tim Sheeper Programs. Then the Parks & Recreation Commission voted unanimously to recommend awarding the pool operation to Tim Sheeper on a four year trial basis.

Meanwhile the city staff attempted to find other pool operators to express interest in operating the pool. None came forward. That is why no RFP was issued. It is common practice in the Federal Government if there are no other interested qualified parties to have a directed procurement.

Also the pool only had a 1-year warranty. Any defects discovered outside the one year were not remediable. The City would have to absorb the cost of curing the defects discovered outside the 1-year warranty period. It was important to get this operation underway since there were no qualified city staff to operate the pool. The city was very fortunate to have Mr. Sheeper offer his services at this most urgent time.

Anyone who questions the quality of service at Burgess Pool only need to ask any of the swimmers. You will be hard pressed to find anyone, other than an SEIU member, who will say the pool was better operated by the City than by Tim Sheeper.

In 2011 the pool will come up for a renewal contract. The City should hold a bidders' conference. If there are other interested bidders then an RFP should be issued. One Section M Evaluation Criteria for Federal Procurements is Past Performance. Since Tim Sheeper’s past performance has been a solid “Blue” other competitors would be at a disadvantage. When an incumbent has outstanding past performance the USG will often retain the incumbent even when other companies underbid him because Past Performance plays such an important role in the proposal evaluation process.

This is so typical of the revisionist history Hank so typically engages in. Read the story, Hank. These guys are finally admitting that Winkler and Duboc asked Sheeper about running the program -- he didn't just wander into the council meeting and make the proposal out of the blue. READ this from the story, Hank:

"Frustrated in his attempts to rent space from the city for the swimming programs he runs, Mr. Sheeper had met with Ms. Winkler and Ms. Duboc in the office of local architect Sam Sinnott, a longtime Sheeper acolyte, to discuss the situation, according to Mr. Sinnott. The councilwomen asked if Mr. Sheeper would try his hand at running the entire range of programs at the pool. He agreed."

Sam Sinnott is acknowledging that when Sheeper couldn't get exactly what he wanted from the city to run his private program at the new pool, he met with two members of the council -- an event otherwise known as "a backroom meeting" -- to air his grievances. Winkler and Duboc obviously were prepared to give the pool away to Sheeper during that council meeting at which Sheeper "surprised" everyone by offering to run the program. The discussion in Sinnott's office was a secret meeting held with two public officials about an important public matter, and the fix was in before anything was ever discussed at a public meeting. This revelation is stunning, and outrageous.

Get your facts straight, Hank. I think you're wrong about the parks and rec commission vote, too, but I don't have time to research it right this moment. Stop revising history. You serve no legitimate purpose by doing so, and you come across like a mere idealogue willing to use any means to win people over to your side.

The question of whether the Parks and Recreation Commission voted to award the contract for the pool to Menlo Swim and Sport has come up several times, on this and other threads. As far as I can tell, they did not, though they did approve the program schedule and fee structure.

In fact, if you look at the minutes for the commission's meeting of Feb. 22, 2006, you'll see that they unanimously passed a motion to make this statement to the City Council:

“The Parks and Recreation Commission is disappointed in being overlooked and not included in the decision process regarding the Burgess Pool lease agreement, and requests to be involved in such future decisions and allowed to engage in its advisory capacity for this contract.”

My only dissatisfaction comes from an inability to get my kids into swim lessons there! Only 200 spots? There are thousands of young kids in MPK, and due to lack of availability kids go to the swamped place in Redwood city. There must be some way to increase capacity, or change the enrollment process so new families can get in.

Dear Joanie,

Tim Sheeper first approached the Parks & Recreation Commission on June 15, 2005 "regarding the potential use of the new Burgess Aquatics Center. After some discussion on the scope of the program Tim was considering, the Commission and Staff gave him several ideas and recommendations. Staff agreed to respond to Tim with a timeline for the pool opening and Tim was asked to prepare a written proposal for consideration. He thanked them for their time and will address the Commission once he has more information".

Yes, Winkler and Duboc met with Sheeper but the gist of the conversation was "Present the Council with a good proposal and all 5 members will consider it". This hardly qualifies as a "back room deal". Your calumnious accusation implies sinister motives, when in actuality, they were just trying to get quality service at no cost to the city. In fact Sheeper has saved the City $400,00 a year for the past four years. That is $1.6 Million in cost savings.

Hank (or should I follow your rude example and say Hankie?),

Your challenge of Joan's premise is empty. According to the quoted passage, presumably from the commission minutes, when Tim first approached the commission, it was to discuss the potential USE of the new pool, not the possibility of operating it. The proposal he was asked for had nothing to do with a proposal to RUN the facilities. Nothing you quote about that meeting has anything to do with what happened later: his backroom meeting with two councilmembers, then, after getting their positive response, "surprising" the council during a public meeting with his proposal. Mickie and Lee hardly hid the fact that they supported privatization of city services, and to suggest they would have been neutral in their response to Tim, with Sam Sinnott applying added pressure, is not believable.

Come on, Hank. You can do better than that.

Diana,

Council members meet with the public all the time. That is part of community outreach. You have not offered any proof whatsoever of a back room deal. Yet you are quite willing to portray Mickie and Lee as iniquitous villains seeking to destroy the fabric of the community. Your pejorative and untrue comments are not appreciated.

Here is an excerpt from the Parks & Rec commission minutes "Staff agreed to respond to Tim with a timeline for the pool opening and Tim was asked to prepare a written proposal for consideration". Now the Parks and Rec commission knew that Tim Sheeper is a pool operator. His sterling reputation was well known to the commission.
They asked him to provide them with a proposal. Now, for those of you who don't understand what a proposal is, it is when someone proposes to offer goods and/or services in exchange for remnuneration of some type.

Now back to Mickie & Lee. Here is what they did. By encouraging Tim Sheeper to bring his proposal before the full council they have saved the city at least $400,000/year and the Menlo Park residents have the best pool operator in the community and most certainly the best pool operator the City of Menlo Park has ever had.

So, while the SEIU and the Slocum acolytes appreciate your calumnious statements the vast majority of Menlo Park residents are not buying it. So, if you don't mind please peddle your "No good deed goes unpunished" nonsense elsewhere.

Hankie,

I don't know about the "vast majority" of residents, but the voters showed their displeasure at the polls by booting out Mickie and Lee, with the pool debacle a primary contributor to their ignominious defeat. Their propensity for backroom dealing -- of which the pool was one shining example -- also helped them wind up at the bottom of the pile.

Sorry, not enough perfume in the world for this pig, and our memories aren't that short. The regulars may love the pool, and Sheeper is serving them well. What about the rest of us?

Nice of the city to put Sheeper in business with a $7mm brand new facility. I don't blame him for taking it and running with it. The rest of us know where the fault lies, and maybe, in your heart of hearts, you do too, Hankie.

The City needed a pool operator and it used the rent as payment for his services. What don't you understand about that? Do you expect your gardner to pay you for the honor of mowing your lawn and fertilizing your garden?

[Portion removed] I don't care if the City paid $50M fo the pool. It is the city's pool not Tim Sheeper's!
He is providing a much need service at a savings of $400,000/year. Not to mention the savings in salary and retirement benefits for the grossly overpaid SEIU employees.

I wish people would let go of their petty grudges and let readers judge Burgess program success for themselves. Please visit other area pools, like Rinconada in PA and Eagle Pool in MV, and then visit Burgess. I think most will be grateful that Menlo Park families have such an enriching, safe, well-run environment.

Regarding comment bickering, maybe this kind of vitriol is what has caused the drop in US union membership in the past 25 years from 20% to 12%. (source: BLS, Economic News Release, Jan 29, 2009)

Mountain View Resident & Burgess Park Pool Swimmer

And what a FANTASTIC drop it is! As long as the union membership continues to decline, we are all much better for it! Drop! Drop! Drop! Yes........

I'd be quite happy to see the unions disappear. But who cares about the unions? For purposes of this discussion, the unions are just a red herring that a few of you (or maybe one poster using multiple handles) keeps bringing up to muddy the waters. There isn't anything that anyone can say that justifies Sheeper being given a brand new pool and not having to pay rent.

By the way, my family prefers Rinconada to Burgess because there's always plenty of room for the low-profit recreational swimmers.

The other red herring that Hankie and others keep on bringing up is the supposed $400k per year cost savings.

It's totally bogus as the old pool was being run as a community pool, open to all and collecting only a modest fee that was never intended to cost any significant portion of the actual cost. With the new pool complex, the mode of operation changed from "open to all" to "for profit."

Given the brand new, multi-use pool complex that replaced the old single pool, I'm sure that even lazy city workers could run the thing at no cost to the city, thereby "saving" the city $400k.

The BIG difference is that Sheeper isn't runnning it as a non-profit, he's looking to rake in the cash left and right (hence, the general public is treated as "riff-raff" in favor of cash-cow swim lessons and Sheeper swim team fanatics).

The Alamanac story's subtitle - "expanding the notion of what a community pool can be" is downright laughable: It's not a community pool, period - it's a cash-cow country club, built at taxpayer expense!

I guess "More Red Herrings From Hank and Friends" knows all about the calculations on the past costs and expenses of the pool? Please show us what year, when the pool was operating, at "no cost to the city". And then, show us, with a specific budget how we're going to do this in the future? This should be great, you've done such a great job with your highly thought out prognosis above, please show us how.

Yes Hank, I would expect my Gardner to pay for the privilege of cleaning my garden, IF HE WAS RENTING OUT FOR GARDEN PARTIES.....what a silly example

You silly SEIU organizers won't be able to sell this nonsense. Please consider the following:

1. The pool is owned by the City. Tim Sheeper does not have title to the pool. He does not own it!

2. The Pool is run much better than when the City ran it. What a shock! Tim Sheeper being able to run the pool better than SEIU [portion removed; see terms of use].

3. The city is saving a minimum of $400,000/year. This is not fair! This money belongs to the SEIU not the residents!

4. You should be concerned with how much the City is saving and not how much Tim Sheeper is making.

5. If you want to charge Sheeper rent, then remember all the people using the pool will have to pay higher fees. While Sheeper may absorb some of the rent cost, the swimmers will absorb the rest.

6. In 99% of all cases private run enterprises are more efficient, more effective, and have a higher quality of service at a lower cost than Government run enterprises.

7. This is just another SEIU ploy to have the Menlo Park swimmers fund their lavish lifestyle.

Everyone is on the this SEIU charade. You have SEIU members write ridiculous blogs in a vain attempt to harass Tim Sheeper out of running the pool. This is done so the SEIU can run the pool. You only care about the Union and not about the residents.

But let me be perfectly clear: The purpose of the City employees is to serve the residents of Menlo Park. It is not the obligation of the residents to pay for bloated salaries and benefits that in the future will crowd out the operating budget. The SEIU fiscal insanity must stop.

Excuse me, Hank. I am not an SEIU member and I have no relations with anyone related to the organization.

You so obviously fish for comments and responses with your posts, you enjoy getting everyone upset because you have given up on this city, you think we are all socialists, you don't participate in anything to speak of and you have no morality when it comes to the truth.

That makes you a great Fox news producer candidate, but it really just turns off readers for this forum.

Please note, Mr. Hines and Mr. Gibboney, your failure to create a credible forum with a set of rules that fosters respect will be your undoing. It is just a matter of time before some other organization figures it out and puts forth a forum worthy of discussion.

Truth,
Au contraire. I have not given up on the city. Just 4 council members who have proven time and again that their allegiance is to the SEIU and not the residents. But that will change next year when we mount an agressive campaign to retire Heyward Robinson and Richard Cline and put in place council members who place the residents' interests above those of the SEIU.