South Side residents urge council to keep Johnson Pool on the 6p ballot

Residents, neighborhood nonprofit leaders and downtown stakeholders urged the Cheyenne City Council on Dec. 10 to keep Johnson Pool in the proposed 6p package and to prioritize replacement or renovation for the South Side.

Amber Ash told the council the pool permanently closed on Aug. 10 because of leaks and rising operating costs and that the city is requesting $10,470,000 to replace and expand Johnson Pool with modern, ADA‑compliant features.

Speakers who grew up using the pool described it as a unique public amenity. Jackie Sentrep, a Ward 1 resident, said she supported the Johnson Pool replacement because it would provide a public outdoor option for families who rely on an outdoor facility; "We're saddened to see it go, but...to be able to host another public opportunity for our community would be amazing," she said. Carla Gregorio, president of the Wyoming Independent Citizens Coalition, said the group is actively working in South Cheyenne and urged the council to treat the pool as a public asset, noting that the survey and design work were funded previously by the 6p tax.

Council members and some residents flagged a pending private proposal for an indoor community facility and asked whether that would duplicate the city’s investment. Jim Ridgeway said he would withhold support for Johnson Pool if a private family trust builds a competing facility nearby, while others — including DDA and neighborhood representatives — said a public pool has distinct value because of cost access and outdoor programming.

Council members asked staff whether the indoor/outdoor distinction mattered. The mayor said the private proposal is indoor while Johnson Pool is an outdoor facility, which staff argued provides a different seasonal use case. No final decision was made; the public hearing served to collect views and identify tradeoffs for council prioritization.

Next steps: staff will continue gathering public input via the online survey through Dec. 17 and return to the Committee of the Whole and council with recommended package options that reflect the city’s fiscal constraints and community priorities.