Panel maps pool-liner fallback without referendum

Other Committee · Meeting of October 26, 2026

NEWINGTON — A Newington committee discussed a liner-based fallback for the town's aging Mill Pond and Churchill pools if a January funding request fails. Staff member Scott said the town spends about $2,000 per pool each season on patch-painting, while members cited a rough liner estimate "as low as $15,000," not including needed crack and void repairs. Members compared the plan to a Vernon, Connecticut, pool project that rose from a contracted $1,247,000 to about $1.8 million after full demolition, though they cautioned the projects are not directly comparable.

They also noted a town charter cap of $2 million on capital projects that avoid a referendum, relevant since a town firehouse project is already headed to referendum this year. Resident Matt Braddock, of 69 Autobahn Road, said he could support a phased approach "as long as there's like a clear vision and outline." No votes were taken; the committee plans to contact engineering firm Weston and Sampson for updated cost estimates before its next meeting, tentatively set for the week before Thanksgiving in November.

In the full story:

• New Business: Planning for a Funding Shortfall
• Grant Research
• Design Scope: Competition Pool, Family Pool and RFP Wording
• Public Comment
• Scheduling
• Who Was There
• Organizations And Documents Referenced
• The complete report: 1,872 words

Source: the Other Committee meeting of October 26, 2026, reported from the official video recording and transcript.

Checked against the record: before publication this article was automatically compared with the meeting transcript. It was corrected where it differed.

The Full Article

New Business: Planning for a Funding Shortfall

Background and stakes: The committee has pursued a full renovation of the Mill Pond and Churchill municipal pools through a request for proposals already completed by the engineering firm Weston and Sampson. That plan depends on a special appropriation the committee hopes the town council will approve in January. With no guarantee the appropriation passes, and with a separate firehouse project already headed to a 2026 referendum, the committee used its October 26 meeting to begin building a backup plan that would not require either a special appropriation vote or a townwide referendum.

The question before the body: whether to begin preparing an alternative, lower-cost repair path, centered on pool liners or a sprayed-concrete resurfacing called shotcrete, that the committee could pursue if January funding falls through.

Substantive content: Members reviewed a report, prepared at the committee's earlier request, comparing vinyl liners to shotcrete resurfacing. According to the discussion, shotcrete carries roughly a 30-year life expectancy but requires resealing every five years or so; a vinyl liner carries a 10-year manufacturer's warranty but, members said, often lasts closer to 15 years in practice. One member cited a liner estimate "as low as $15,000," but cautioned that figure likely omits required prep work: filling cracks and voids in the existing pool shell before a liner can be installed. Staff member Scott told the group the town currently spends roughly $2,000 per pool each season on patching and repainting, and said any future repainting would require sandblasting first because of built-up paint layers, which risks exposing additional wall defects.

Members discussed a $15,000 to $25,000 balance of unspecified state grant money from a prior year that could help offset a narrower, liner-only request for proposals. One member suggested Weston and Sampson might discount further work given the design groundwork the firm already completed under the original RFP.

To test pricing assumptions, members cited a comparable project in Vernon, Connecticut, where a liner-replacement contract began at $1,247,000 and finished around $1.8 million after a full demolition of an existing gunite pool and deck. Several members pushed back on using that figure directly, since Vernon's project involved complete demolition that Newington's fallback plan would not include. "You can get stuck in this, trying to compare... is their pool the same size as our pool," one member said, arguing the committee instead needs its own vendor-specific estimate using Newington's actual pool dimensions.

A separate cautionary example came up: the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool in Washington, D.C., where a reported $6 million renovation using an "American flag blue" industrial coating has blistered and peeled, reportedly due to insufficient primer and incompatible coating layers sprayed over expansion joints. Members were careful to distinguish that failure, which involved a painted coating, from the vinyl liner option under discussion. "That wasn't a vinyl liner. That was vinyl paint. So that's totally different," one member said, adding, "we're not going to use that contractor."

A vendor representative identified in the discussion only as Patrick, described as having visited the committee twice, had reportedly recommended shotcrete over a liner specifically because of the liner's shorter warranty period, while acknowledging that liner longevity depends heavily on how thoroughly underlying cracks are sealed before installation. Members noted standing water is deliberately left in the pools over winter to prevent damage from groundwater intrusion near Mill Pond.

A committee member who arrived late in the meeting, apologizing for the delay, asked whether pool decking work could be separated from liner installation, and whether removing decking might risk damaging a newly installed liner. Other members agreed that doing the decking, piping and liner work simultaneously made more practical sense. "It's like when you paint a room, you paint the room and then the next room looks bad," one member said, comparing a piecemeal approach to incomplete renovation that leaves adjacent surfaces looking mismatched. Members also noted that contractors may decline to issue a liner warranty, or may limit it, if underlying wall defects are not fully repaired first.

The deliberation also touched on municipal finance mechanics: one member asked about the town's capital improvement program threshold, and another responded that the town charter currently sets a $2 million cap on project costs that can proceed without going to a townwide vote. Projects above that threshold require referendum approval. Members connected that threshold to timing concerns, noting the town's firehouse project is already on this year's referendum ballot, which could reduce the council's appetite for placing a second major capital item on a ballot next year.

Procedural steps and outcome: No motion was made or vote taken on the liner-versus-shotcrete question or on any phased repair plan. Members agreed, without a formal vote, to have staff contact Weston and Sampson for updated pricing and scope guidance, and to gather vendor-specific cost estimates tied to the town's actual pool measurements before the next meeting.

Implications and what is next: The committee's preferred outcome remains full funding of both pools through the January appropriation request. Absent that funding, the fallback plan sketched Monday would likely keep both pools' current footprint rather than pursue the slightly revised designs shown in earlier renderings, according to one member's response to a resident's question, and would focus repair dollars on liners, decking and piping within the town's $2 million no-referendum threshold.

Grant Research

Background and stakes: With a town budget already strained by other capital needs, staff have been pursuing outside grant funding to supplement any town-funded pool work.

The question before the body: an update on grant research rather than a request for committee action.

Substantive content: A staff member reported attending a national conference and a regional meeting the prior week focused on identifying aquatics-related grant opportunities. At that meeting, the staffer connected with a counterpart identified as Grant Reiter, a grant writer for the town of Wethersfield, who offered to help point Newington toward relevant funding sources once her current Wethersfield project wraps up. A colleague described as a director from Windsor suggested setting up an automated weekly email alert, using artificial intelligence tools, to flag new state and national grant opportunities covering aquatics projects and ADA-compliance work for bathhouses and restrooms. The staffer said any leads found would be forwarded to the town's grant writer.

Members discussed whether grants typically cover an entire pool project or only discrete components, such as the pool itself, a bathhouse, or a splash pad separately, noting that funders "tend to be separate" and that ADA-specific restroom grants in particular are "far and few between."

Deliberation and outcome: No vote was taken. The committee agreed informally that identifying a clear priority among pool, bathhouse and splash-pad components would make it easier to pursue targeted grants once the town's funding picture becomes clearer in January.

Design Scope: Competition Pool, Family Pool and RFP Wording

Background and stakes: The committee's original RFP language restricted splash-pad features to areas "adjacent to" the main pools, a scope members said should be loosened.

The question before the body: whether to revise RFP wording and resolve open design questions, including which pool would serve competitive swimming versus family recreation.

Substantive content: One member proposed changing the RFP language from "adjacent to" to "adjacent to or within," to allow splash-pad features to be integrated directly into a pool design rather than built as a standalone structure. Members noted integrated features could extend seasonal usability but would raise lifeguard staffing questions, since lifeguard requirements are driven by occupancy counts rather than pool size alone. Members acknowledged the committee has not yet decided which of the two pools, if either, would be designated for competitive swim meets versus family use, with one member noting competitive use may not generate enough participation or revenue to justify the designation.

Outcome: No vote was taken. Members agreed design specifics, including the competition-versus-family designation, would likely not be finalized until around January.

Public Comment

Matt Braddock, who identified himself as a resident of 69 Autobahn Road, told the committee he did not object to a phased, "piecemeal" liner-and-bathhouse approach, provided the public is given "a clear vision and outline" distinguishing it from doing only part of the work. He also asked whether the committee had abandoned minor footprint revisions shown in earlier architectural drawings, such as slightly larger wading or lap areas, in favor of an unchanged footprint paired only with liner work. A committee member responded that if the full RFP funding does not materialize, the fallback plan would likely retain the pools' current footprint rather than pursue those revised layouts.

Scheduling

The committee agreed to skip its typical December meeting because of the holidays and instead hold its next session the week before Thanksgiving in November, with a staff member to confirm an exact date and possible venue change pending town-building availability.

WHO WAS THERE

• Committee chair, name not stated in the transcript or any supplied document: presided over the meeting and entertained the motion to adjourn.
• Scott, staff member overseeing pool operations: title not confirmed in available sources; answered questions on repainting costs and liner prep work.
• Tim, committee member: referenced discussing the committee being without direction absent action.
• Bill, committee member: participated remotely; previously raised the idea of purchasing a movable floating dock for use at the high school pool.
• AJ, committee member: asked about the capital improvement program's $2 million referendum threshold.
• James, staff or committee liaison: to help coordinate the next meeting's scheduling.
• An unnamed committee member who arrived late: asked about separating decking work from liner installation and about pool accessibility design.
• Matt Braddock, public commenter: identified himself as a resident of 69 Autobahn Road.
• Patrick, outside vendor representative: described as having visited the committee twice to discuss liner and shotcrete options; not confirmed present at this specific meeting.
• Grant Reiter, grant writer for the town of Wethersfield: referenced as a contact made at a recent conference, not present at the meeting.
• An unnamed colleague described as "a director from Windsor": referenced as having suggested an AI-based grant-alert system at a recent regional meeting, not present at the meeting.

ORGANIZATIONS AND DOCUMENTS REFERENCED

• Weston and Sampson: engineering firm that produced the original pool renovation RFP and design work; members proposed contacting the firm for updated liner and shotcrete guidance.
• Connecticut Custom Aquatics (also referenced as Custom Pools): the vendor the town currently uses for pool maintenance; its representative reviewed the pools' concrete integrity for potential liner installation.
• Town of Vernon, Connecticut: cited for a comparable liner-replacement project that began at a contracted $1,247,000 and finished around $1.8 million after full demolition.
• Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, Washington, D.C.: cited as a cautionary example of a failed $6 million coating renovation, distinguished by members from the vinyl liner option under discussion.
• Town of Wethersfield: employs grant writer Grant Reiter, who offered assistance identifying aquatics-related grant opportunities.
• Newington town charter capital threshold: cited by a member as capping non-referendum capital projects at $2 million.
• Newington firehouse referendum (2026): cited as a factor that could affect the town council's appetite for an additional capital referendum next year.