Richardson council advances 2026 bond process after heated debate over Cottonwood Pool

Richardson's City Council directed staff to prepare a resolution to call a 2026 bond election after a second public hearing that drew sharp comments over plans to remove Cottonwood Pool.

The hearing Wednesday reviewed a multi-proposition bond package that staff said would dedicate nearly 60% of proceeds to streets and alleys, with separate allocations for public buildings, parks and sidewalks. City staff presented specifics including a public buildings authorization (part of which would not be sold until FY 2032), a $114 million streets package, a $5 million-per-year concrete-replacement strategy, erosion-control work, and fire-department facility projects including an $8 million apparatus building and renovations to Fire Station 6.

Why it matters: Council members and residents flagged equity concerns over parks spending after staff noted plans to remove Cottonwood Pool and install a spray ground as part of an adopted aquatics master plan. Several council members emphasized they want options that reflect earlier master-plan directions while keeping the council's long-range vision in mind before calling an election.

Resident Sandy Haney, who lives on West Belt Line Road, urged the council to "save the Cottonwood Pool," saying neighborhood residents rely on its lap lanes and that replacing it with a splash pad would not serve adults or provide comparable swim programming. "Pools are not just for kids," Haney said, and asked the council to prioritize existing neighborhood pools over additional amenities elsewhere.

Council Member Barrios said she would not support the bond as drafted because of parks-priority concerns and what she described as unequal distribution of projects across the city. Council Member Corcoran and others rebutted that the parks commission reviewed options and that the aquatics plan had offered multiple scenarios; Corcoran noted the commission's unanimous recommendation for the option now under consideration.

After extended discussion about timing and public engagement, Mayor Pro Tem Huchenrider moved, and Council Member Arffine seconded, a motion directing staff to draft a resolution for the Feb. 9 council meeting to call the bond election; the motion passed unanimously. Mr. Magner (staff) told council that acting on the resolution Feb. 9 would be the action that formally calls the May 2 election if council so chooses.

The council did not adopt project-level designs or commit to sale timing beyond the authorizations discussed; staff emphasized that some authorizations (notably portions of the public buildings proposition) were intended to provide future-year capacity and that construction sale timing could be deferred.

Looking ahead: Staff will prepare the resolution and return to council with the formal language on Feb. 9 for council action to call the bond election.