The Cameron Park Community Services District will pursue construction of a single community center building, with an assembly hall, stage, kitchen, offices, classrooms, senior center and teen room, after directors determined that limited funds and rising construction costs make it impossible to build a larger complex at this time.But the board also agreed Thursday to solicit bids for a competition swimming pool and support facilities, in the hope that a downturn in residential and commercial construction will result in more favorable prices from contractors looking for work.
The decision to commit to the portion of the project that officials say has the best chance of generating revenue for the district was made despite pleas from parents and representatives of area water polo and swim teams that the community's greatest need is a swimming pool.
Director Valerie Coze said she was not convinced two months ago, when the board proposed a phased project, that the district had done due diligence in seeking more affordable options. But given legal constraints on how $8.5 million in local bond monies may be used, Coze said, she believed the recommendation before the board Thursday was the best alternative.
"I don't vote with joy, but I vote with confidence that this project must proceed," she said.
Several area residents, including those who advocated for a swimming pool, said they recognized the difficult decision facing the board."I feel sorry for you guys to be in this predicament," said Tod Pickett, a board member of the Sierra Sharks swim team. "The community voted on something, and we're obviously not going to get that something."
The district has $10.1 million available for the project, including $8.5 million in revenue from a bond measure approved by voters in 2005 and $1 million in community enhancement funds from the county. But the price tag for the project presented to voters currently is estimated at $19 million.
The original plan called for three buildings totaling 22,687 square feet and housing an assembly hall, youth activity center, classrooms and a commercial kitchen. Also included were a gymnasium, and competition and recreation swimming pools.
Directors said Thursday that the district had been offered a $2.2 million loan with an interest rate of 4.7 percent to 5 percent. But board president Dale Gerger said accepting it would obligate the district to approximately $174,000 a year in loan payments.
Coze said the district's financial adviser recommended against incurring the additional debt.
Pickett urged the board to consider remodeling a 10,000-square-foot former Ace Hardware building for use as an assembly hall, arguing that the district then would have enough money left to build a pool.
But board members said their bond counsel advised them that, based on the language in the 2005 ballot measure, the bond monies could be used only to construct and equip new facilities, not to acquire existing buildings.
Directors said they also had asked project architects and engineers to determine the cost of redesigning the project to provide a combination assembly hall-gymnasium and a competition pool.
Architect Brian Brown said a competition pool and support facilities would cost about $5.7 million. With additional architectural, engineering and permitting costs associated with the redesign, the district would be left with enough money to construct only a 2,300-square-foot building.
Although expressing disappointment with the district's inability to deliver the entire project, residents urged the board to work within its budget.
Nadine Petty said she wanted to see the plan go forward, even if it meant eliminating some components of the project. Petty said she favored building features that had the potential to generate revenue for the district.
"I don't want to get in debt in the process," she said.
Yvette Ashlock said she campaigned for the bond measure with the promise that the community center would provide something for everyone. Upon learning that the district would not be able to deliver as promised, Ashlock said she had suggested returning the bond money and abandoning the project, but was told that was not an option.
The board, she said, presented the project to voters based on information available at the time the measure was placed on the ballot.
"The cost overrun is nobody's fault," Ashlock said.
She urged the board to proceed with the assembly building, saying, "We're running out of time."
Directors said they are hopeful that with the changing construction climate, bids will come in below estimates.
