Nancy Wright: No cost benefit analysis was done for Moultonborough HUB

To The Daily Sun,

After months of gathering information the HUB Committee has not provided costs. Absent costs, a cost/benefit analysis cannot be performed. Voters need to know the costs to design, build, operate and maintain a center with two indoor pools.

Look at Dover, (population 33,000). According to Dover's recreation director, despite imposed annual fees to use the pool, the city runs an annual deficit of $300,000 to operate just the six-lane pool. If Dover runs this deficit with a larger population, what will Moultonborough taxpayers pay to subsidize two pools? What will we pay to subsidize the gym/function spaces?

Once the HUB committee determined the size and scope of the HUB, the committee could have done further research and gotten approximate estimates to share with voters at Town Meeting. What are the annual costs to staff, operate and maintain the HUB, above and beyond the costs just to build it?

Asking for seed money before knowing costs to construct and operate the HUB is putting the cart before the horse. With Article 8, the HUB committee wants voters to approve putting our tax money in a fund for the HUB, endorsing their plan. The alternative is to vote no on Article 8 and return the already collected tax money back to taxpayers.

Las Cruces, New Mexico (population 108,000) is constructing an eight-lane indoor pool. It’s been in the works for at least four years. Kudos to the city for doing a cost/benefit analysis. The 2018 report estimates $18 million and states the pool is not self-sustaining.

The $18 million, 26,891-square-foot Las Cruces facility includes a pool, locker rooms, bathrooms and lobby. Based on Las Cruces’s estimate for one indoor pool does $18 million sound unreasonable for the HUB’s 34,000-square-foot multi-use facility?

Nancy Wright

Moultonborough