Area Resident: Aquatic Center Admission Too High
Officials Say More Amenities Available at Rogers Facility
Posted: March 13, 2013 at 5 a.m.
ROGERS — Not everyone is jumping for joy over the $13 million aquatic center scheduled to open in May.
At A Glance
Center Pricing
In addition to the Roger Aquatic Center, there are smaller aquatic centers with fewer attractions in Siloam Springs, Prairie Grove, Springdale and Bentonville. Admission price ranges from $2 to $4. Fayetteville doesn’t have an aquatic center, but has a pool at Wilson Park.
Source: Staff Report
This story is only available from our archives.
(Advertisement)
« Previous Story
Man Found Near Walmart
ROGERS — A man missing since a Saturday disagreement with his wife, was found Monday night, police said. Read »
Next Story »
Missouri Man Killed In Accident
GARFIELD — A Seligman, Mo., man died Tuesday in a two-vehicle accident on U.S. 62 on Tuesday morning, authorit... Read »
Comments
To report abuse or misuse of this area please hit the "Suggest Removal" link in the comment to alert our online managers. Please read our comment policy.
It is very unfortunate that the City Of Rogers no longer has an option available for those that can't afford to take out a loan to go to the pool. I voted for the bond issue that is paying for this water park. I will never use the facilities. I can take my entire family to the Bentonville pool for the entire summer, for less than 1 day in Rogers. I don't think that the amenities are the issue, the biggest issue is lack of AFFORDABLE options.
I drive past the new aquatic center daily, it looks very nice, but not that nice. If Alma is the closest to what Rogers is building, why is the price almost double? I don't think that many workers are going to be needed, from all of the people I have talked to, they won't be going to this new facility.
Posted by: adad24
March 13, 2013 at 6:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
I have to agree that the city may have priced themselves out of having a large turnout of people. I may go once but that will probably be all. It is just too high cost for a city pool that takes in tax dollars.
Posted by: mike1153
March 13, 2013 at 7:02 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
I think the article uncovered the real problem when it said "The biggest expense is labor, city officials said. Approximately 80 employees will be needed". It sounds like there are too many city officials who are looking to create a job for their teenage kids and relatives. I'm not seeing the need for 30 lifeguards, even at peak capacity, much less on a slow day. Fifty other employees split between 2 shifts seems excessive too. Let's see some numbers to justify that huge payroll.
Posted by: boyscout57
March 13, 2013 at 8:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
I thinks the powers that be need to rethink the cost. Looks like they are making the pool a once a summer event for some kids. The price is way to high and Mr Hayes needs to come off the high priced horse and get real. The people of Rogers expected more from the city planners than this. Typical government operation over inflate everything to get more money from tax payers.
I'm sure if the Mr. Hayes would have said early that the pool will cost 12 dollars a day that the bond issue would not have past.
Posted by: troutjig
March 13, 2013 at 8:56 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Everyone obviously has their own thoughts on the aquatic center. Surely, as the plans were being developed and dissiminated by city officials, these people did not have their heads in the sand? As for the resident that states "Rogers is not a tourist destination....", she clearly is not listening to or reading about the direction our city leaders are taking us. With the Crystal Bridges Museum; the addition of the new sports park in Rogers; and now the aquatic center, that's precisely what Rogers and NW Arkansas is developing into. Having these amenities will not only help to draw new business to the area, it will also draw people to the area to spend a weekend here, a weekend there, or perhaps even longer. Is the price exorbitant? No, it's really not. Those who have traveled outside the region know full well the cost of a first class attraction like the aquatic center will be. It was never touted to be just a municipal pool. Unfortunately some will not be able to afford the cost of admission. Others will not go based solely on their principle. That's their choice. Having lived in several large cities, I for one am anxious to see the aquatic center open and for Rogers to continue to expand its offerings.
Posted by: nwasoonerfan
March 13, 2013 at 9:06 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Of course the operations cost is going to be more -- the park is THREE TIMES the size of any other park in the area. What the park management is failing to mention is that they should be able to accommodate THREE TIMES the number of customers, which should therefore offset the increase in expenses. There is absolutely no need to have such high admissions if your volume of visitors is also high. The smart play would be to lower admissions (dare I say CUT THEM IN HALF) then see if they need to raise admissions (or lower admissions) next season.
Posted by: Bubba72704
March 13, 2013 at 10:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
What baffles me is that they can build something and have absolutely no idea what it will cost to run it? Isn't that part of the planning process?
How much chemicals? Surely this shouldn't be a mystery? Give me a break.
It's like they blindly went and built something and now have no idea how to run it? I couldn't go and start a business and get a business loan and tell the bank that " I have no idea what my costs are going to be, so I'll just charge double my competitors and hope for the best"
ugh.
Posted by: spinsister
March 13, 2013 at 10:52 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Hey nwasoonerfan news Crystal Bridges in Bentonville. Oh and by the way it is free to attend. Bentonville has hotels and restaurants. they may not make it to the sports park or the pool. The sports park is really a sport park for baseball,softball not hardly a center piece for all who do sports. The price is to HIGH at the pool and that will be reflected in the attendance this coming year ,keep it high and see what happens. Then we can watch how Mr Hayes handles that but I predict that the pressure will continue on Mr Hayes and he will see that he is a tax paid employee of the city and will end up doing what the people who pay is salary want. I encourage people to call your local council members and the mayor. they do work for you and are accountable to the voters. No matter what they think.
Posted by: troutjig
March 13, 2013 at 11:05 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
What I don't understand is the cost difference between the Alma park and the one here. Their operating budget is nearly half a million dollars a year but the entry price is much cheaper, particularly for families with young children. One day's worth of amusement for a family, which with small children really boils down to a few hours, is not worth $50. There are so many other options out there that are significantly cheaper and don't rely on good weather.
Posted by: relao
March 13, 2013 at 12:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Hey troutjig, read the post again. You'll notice I said Rogers and NW Arkansas. I know precisely where Crystal Bridges is. My point was not to support the cost of attendance. My point was to refute the statement that Rogers is not a tourist attraction. It's rapidly becoming one.The museum is helping to fill the hotels in the area. The new sports park will bring teams in for tournaments and help fill the hotels. People coming to see the Naturals will help fill the hotels. It all adds up people. And that supports the belief that the waterpark will give the people one more thing to do while they're in town. It's not a municipal pool. You can still go to the Jones Center in Springdale or the pool in Bentonville.
Posted by: nwasoonerfan
March 13, 2013 at 9:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
>>“We know the pumps will use a lot of electricity, but until we run the pumps for a season, we won’t know how much electricity it takes,” Hayes said.<
That's one statement I couldn't believe anyone would make.
Take your pump specs, your electricity rate and volumes to be pumped to any sophomore engineering student at UoA and they will tell you at any given level of use how much electricity you will use.
Who do they hire for administrators in Rogers?
Posted by: cdawg
March 14, 2013 at 12:13 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Has anyone thought of a season pass? Price it where locals can catch a break yet vistors will pay the higher per visit single admission rate. Just a thought. Many attractions like amusement parks, zoos, etc. use this pricing structure successfully.
Posted by: boyscout57
March 14, 2013 at 7:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Boyscout - there is something like a 10 day pass, but I believe it cost more than a season pass in Branson. It looks like this pricing structure was created to cater to the wealthy who will pay upwards of $50 a day to swim in pool that excludes the poor and minorities out by pricing them out.
Posted by: jlonber
March 14, 2013 at 9:13 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
The 10 visit pass costs $85, the season pass to White Water in Branson is $88. What a joke.
Posted by: relao
March 14, 2013 at 9:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
There are some questions to be asked. Is the city of Rogers going into for profit business but failing to tell the tax base this was a business that would be used to make money for the city. Then would that money be used for what ever the powers that be want ,there for getting around any questions about bond money.
Are cities functions now to make money and compete against free enterprise while using the tax payer's money interest free. just some questions to think about.
Posted by: troutjig
March 14, 2013 at 5:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
I don't think the City wants to do anything more than cover the operating costs of the aquatic center. After the first season, I would expect some adjustments to be made to the ticketing process. Trust me, a LOT more people would be squealing if the City lost money than people squealing now because the cost of admission is too high
Posted by: nwasoonerfan
March 14, 2013 at 6:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Registration is required to make comments. Click here to LOGIN.
You can register for FREE to post comments and receive alerts.