A recent Roanoke Times article by Lerone Graham about Christiansburg's long delayed aquatic center was pretty informative. Now the public knows where town council is laying the blame.
Design changes. So that would be because of what Virginia Tech needed to add on, in order to bring the facility up to ACC standards? Be sure to read another article, published in August 2005, which clearly identifies these design changes. Four years ago. Construction was slated to begin by the end of the year in that article.
Be sure to review a summary of the timeline for this project, after a community pool was identified as the #1 "want" in the town's 10-year recreation plan (which was prepared in 1994 and updated in 2000). This timeline was culled from council's public meeting minutes.
One year ago, the town's website was still proclaiming a Fall 2008 opening date. In Graham's article, the town manager is saying he doesn't know where an October 1, 2009 opening date came from -- the two companies building the project "have been asked" to come up with a best estimate for when the facility will be complete. If you watch the video recording of the town's first budget work session held this April 17, you'll hear where that target date came from.
Citizens aren't the only ones frustrated with this project. Not only costs expanding from $5 million to nearly $18 million for this amenity, construction has been dragging out for over 3 years now. Remember, the town already owned the land it decided to build on.
Past and current council members have expressed ongoing frustration as well -- first for getting a business plan, next over the single RFP and initial lease agreement between the town and VT for use of the facility, and most recently with having a concrete opening date set. Note the four year lapse in the agreement and actually having a contract between the town and VT, too.
The next brouhaha will be over the town's purchasing the facility from Lionberger Construction once it's actually complete (which goes back to the Aquatic Timeline from January 2006, and out of the realm of public meetings or documents).
What is more important than determining blame -- relative to total costs, or reasons behind the delays in opening the facility -- is to determine what it will provide to and cost Christiansburg residents. This is to be a "public" facility because taxpayers bought and paid for it, and so we own it.
What hours will it be open, and are there any restrictions to when residents can access the facility? How many other events will be forfeited (and with these, presumably revenues) because of delays? What will it cost a family to visit the facility for a day? For an annual membership? When will it open? Will revenues offset 40 or even 60% of the operating costs, as initially promised? How will it be marketed, and will it bring additional lodging/sales/meals tax revenues to the town's coffers?
We'll not find out until three to five years after whenever the doors finally open. What voters should be aware of is who was involved with this from day one, and whether these people should remain. What voters should decide is whether those currently involved in getting it opened have the information needed to make fully informed decisions, and that they represent the best interests of all town residents today.