Splash pad creates tense and unproductive debate between city officials

The splash pad project in downtown Newton continues to incite disagreements among elected officials, particularly between mayor Evelyn George and council member Randy Ervin. But one other city council member suggested they find a real solution instead of arguing over issues that he said are not constructive.

Arguments over the splash pad resurfaced at a recent goal setting session and then once again at the end of the Sept. 16 council meeting. The mayor and the city council listed the addition of public restrooms at the splash pad as their No. 1 non-street project goal for 2024-2026, much to Ervin’s chagrin.

In an attempt to restate his feelings about the project to the public, Ervin argued that if the city council follows through with its No. 1 goal, then it will have turned the splash pad into an almost $1 million project. George immediately shook her head and disputed the council member’s claims. Ervin gave her the floor.

Explaining the background of the splash pad, George said it initially started out with the city reserving the land for the project. The committee then raised more than $400,000 in private funds, which was the anticipated cost of the splash pad at that time. George claimed there was enough money to pay for restrooms.

“With the money they raised and the money the council approved, there is still a balance of $244,974 to pay for the restrooms,” George said.

Council member Melissa Dalton interjected and denied that claim, “No. I was just told that was going to the concrete people.”

“Then we will need to have another discussion on that.”

George went on to recall the meeting in which splash pad supporters filled the council chambers in anticipation for the project to come to a vote in late 2023. It was another unanimous decision like the council’s vote to decide the location of the splash pad. The mayor then called out Ervin’s lack of support.

“As a council member, you don’t have individual agendas,” George said. “You have the agenda that’s for the best interests of the community, and when the majority vote for something you have to get on board with a majority vote. That’s what a democracy is.”

Other city projects have gone over budget, and George compared the situation with the splash pad to the challenges faced with the new clubhouse at Westwood Golf Course. The clubhouse has gone over budget and has surpassed the amount issued in the park bond that was approved by voters.

“Both of those are expected and desired by our citizens and different groups of citizens,” she said. “We have to support and we have to finish those projects.”

George also argued the public is excited to see restrooms added to the splash pad just as much as they are excited about PGI potentially holding another convention in town, of which Ervin is an organizer for. George said there was pushback for the pickleball courts and pool features. They also went over budget.

Still, council member Joel Mills said there are key differences between the splash pad and projects like the clubhouse and pickleball courts. The latter park projects were included as part of a park bond approved by the voters, and the splash pad was not. Mills went on to say the splash pad was a “private idea.”

Indeed, it was launched by a private group but it was never intended to be a private project. It was always pitched as a public-private partnership.

Mills said he never expected to get so many phone calls and have so many conversations with people in opposition to the splash pad and the proposed public bathrooms. He was also concerned there would be no fencing around the park to protect kids who may wander off from parents “glued to their phones.”

“This was a plan that did not have a lot of money and it was not taxpayer money,” Mills said of the committee that raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for the project. “This was not voted on like the other projects were, so I don’t appreciate anyone saying, ‘Well, we need to do this, we need to do that.’ No.”

George argued the splash pad project was repeatedly delayed and over time the price tag inflated beyond the initial goal set by the group and agreed to by the council. But the mayor said inflated prices did not prevent the city from completing other parks projects.

“It’s valuable to continue with both the clubhouse and the downtown park to completion,” George said. “That’s my position.”

PAST ACTION CONFLICTS WITH ERVIN’S ARGUMENTS

When the splash pad project was first introduced to city council members in early 2021, Ervin was skeptical of the location and the costs to the city. Back then it was said by the committee leading the project that the reason downtown was chosen was largely due to fundraising. It was the ideal location for donors.

Still, Ervin believed it should have been a feature at Agnes Patterson Park or Maytag Park, the latter of which was also suggested by park board members when the project was first presented to them. It was initially believed the water system could be connected to the pool. Staff said this was not the case.

Park board minutes from the February 2021 meeting show that some members later changed their mind and liked the idea of the splash pad being downtown. Ervin has often referred to the park board’s initial lukewarm reaction to the splash pad as a counterpoint to support his claims. But past action shows differently.

On Feb. 17, 2021, the Newton Park Board — consisting of Bryce Heitman, Melanie Humphrey, Jeff Osby, Rachelle Tipton and Adam Vandall at the time — held a discussion and a vote on a recommendation of support for the proposed downtown splash pad project at 224 W. Third St. N.

Park board voted 4-0 on recommending support for the downtown splash pad project. Vandall was not present at the meeting and could not submit a vote.

Recently, Ervin said he visited the splash pad to get a feel for what was being constructed and compared it to the initial designs presented to council. To him, the site looked nothing like those early drawings. Despite the site not being finished, the designs had gone through a number of revisions at council request.

Which is partly why Ervin is so frustrated with the splash pad and has become more vocal with his concerns about the city project. He gives the impression that the restrooms and other amenities featured in the original designs meant they would be included in the initial construction.

Ervin said, “For us to go back out and pay up to $350,000 additional taxpayer money to continue work on that park when we were told from the first design, and again when we gave the $200,000 the second time, we were told that included restrooms. And here we are asking for more city money to complete that project.”

However, it was apparent that the splash pad would be a multi-phase project from as early as 2021 and would not have all of its amenities in the first phase.

From the same February 2021 park board meeting, Heitman, who led the project, said the committee was collecting design quotes from firms for a $400,000 to $500,000 phase one project that included just the splash pad. Heitman said the additional park upgrades could come later in the second phase.

Additionally, Heitman said the funding was not in hand yet but the committee would try not to seek any city funds for at least the first phase.

Which has also been Ervin’s biggest argument. Although by definition the splash pad is a public-private partnership, it was assumed the committee would raise considerable funds for the project. It did just that. The committee raised $417,000 for the splash pad, about half of which was pledged by an anonymous donor.

Newton City Council voted 6-0 in December 2023 to approve the splash pad project for $550,812. The remaining funds would be covered by the city. Even Ervin voted in favor of it, and told council members that although he had his issues with it he would support the project.

Recent comments — spurred by the proposed public restroom addition and the $20,000 change orders — suggest Ervin is not in support of the project. He is frustrated with how the city spent the money on the engineering of the project and then “all of a sudden assumed it was a city park.”

The splash pad was always assumed to be the city’s responsibility from the initial meetings the committee had with the park board. It was always going to be a city park and a city project. Even the minutes from the February 2021 park board meeting say the city “would eventually own and maintain the splash pad.”

ARGUING IS NOT A CONSTRUCTIVE SOLUTION

After George stated her position, Ervin said while he respected her position he finds it hard to believe she would recommend the city complete the clubhouse and the downtown park bathrooms yet she did not prioritize it during the goal setting session. She argued she has always voted in support of the clubhouse.

“I speak in support of it publicly,” George said. “I speak in support of the downtown park. I speak—”

Ervin said, “But you gave it no votes, correct?”

“Because I knew you wouldn’t vote for the other.”

“Absolutely not.”

“Even though when the room is full then you’re in support of it.”

Still, Ervin argued the splash pad is becoming an almost $1 million project.

Ervin went on to claim the city has provided $200,000 toward the project when it was first approved by council. The bid came in at $550,812. If the $417,000 in private funds is deducted, that leaves the city to cover the remaining $133,812. Add on the $20,000 change orders, and that becomes $153,812.

If the city council moves forward with the public restrooms and pays the estimated maximum amount of $350,000, then the city’s portion of the project would equate to $503,812. Again, if the maximum amount is paid for the restrooms, then the project would have cost $920,812.

“You are just short of $1 million,” Ervin said. “And, of that, $600,000 of that is taxpayer money. Correct me if I’m wrong.”

It is important to note the restrooms are only one aspect of the full project. The city estimates the public restrooms, a concrete pad and a shade structure could cost between $175,000 to $350,000 depending on the size and additional amenities.

George said she misunderstood the information that was provided to her and that she would give more clarification.

Council member Stacy Simbro said unless officials are going to tear out the splash pad, then they have to deal with it.

“I appreciate all the input, but it doesn’t feel very constructive,” he said. “This is a council. We’re here to solve things. I didn’t get on here and neither did Joel until last minute. I haven’t done my homework to understand everything, but unless we’re going to tear the whole pipework out we gotta figure out what we’re going to do with it. That’s the reality.”