www.roanoke.com

How did a municipal swimming pool turn into a state-of-the-art aquatic center? How can Christiansburg, already tapping into budget reserves, support a facility the town manager admits will generate only 40 percent of its operating costs? How and why did the town use a public-private partnership and an unsolicited bid to avoid traditional procurement processes?

In 2001, then-Mayor Harold Linkous appointed a committee to "begin planning for a future municipal swimming pool," probably in response to a 1998 survey of citizens in which 191 respondents indicated a need for an aquatic center.

In September 2004, Christiansburg Town Manager Lance Terpenny mentioned he felt Radford University and Virginia Tech would use the pool if it were bigger. Did those 191 residents say we needed to build a pool for RU and Tech? No.

By October 2004, the pool had doubled in length to 50 meters to accommodate the universities. Terpenny noted the additional cost for the longer pool as $2.5 million and asked to hold fundraising projects to cover the extra costs. Is asking for handouts to pay for a pool for RU and Tech responsible government? No.

In December 2004, two more pools were added to the project. Had those survey respondents said anything about a 50-meter pool for Atlantic Coast Conference swim meets, or a therapeutic pool? No. They wanted a place to swim with their families.

It is important to note that the first vote on anything resembling an aquatic center, as opposed to a municipal pool, was in December 2004. Council voted unanimously to borrow $13 million to build something. No architect or contractor had been chosen, no drawings existed, and there was not even a plan for operating the facility or for generating income.

Was this good stewardship of our tax dollars and the public trust? No.

The comprehensive agreement between the town and Lionberger Construction wasn't signed until June 20, 2007. It describes Phases I and II of the project.

The agreement says, "proceeding with Phase II shall be at the sole option of the town." Among other things, Phase II includes "toilet partitions and accessories for the restrooms on the main floor," which had already been built in Phase I. Phase II also includes "complete build out of all rooms shown on the main floor."

Why was Phase II optional? What use are unfinished rooms and toilets without partitions? No use at all.

Interestingly, there is no Phase III mentioned in the agreement.

Yet, on June 19, 2007, Terpenny announced $2 million was still needed for Phase III.

Where is the documentation for Phase III? Is Phase III code-speak for "additional stuff we are doing for Tech"? Probably.

A FOIA request for all change orders has been submitted to the town. No documentation is available on the town's website.

In January 2006, Terpenny met with the town attorney and representatives from Reynolds Architects and Lionberger about a possible public-private partnership to construct the Aquatic Center. Public-private partnerships are a legal tool to allow municipalities to work around traditional procurement procedures in order to save time and money.

Have time and money been saved on the aquatic center because of the partnership? No.

In September 2006, Terpenny announced receipt of an unsolicited bid, allowed under a partnership, to build the aquatic center. He did not reveal who the bid was from.

A subsequent 45-day open bidding period reportedly generated no other bids to construct the facility. It's unbelievable that a project of this size, properly advertised, would not generate a single bid.

Since Lionberger was awarded the contract, we know who submitted the unsolicited bid. But was the bid really "unsolicited," following that January meeting between Lionberger, the town and Reynolds?

And, why did the town pay Lionberger $15,000 in June 2006? Town Hall, also built by Lionberger, was paid for and open by then.

In terms of a partnership, does solicited or unsolicited really matter? It only matters if you want the truth from your town's staff, and from the town council that is supposed to be supervising them.

Please vote carefully on May 4.

Terry Ellen Carter is a Christiansburg activist.