The issue of sharing use and costs for the swimming pool at BHS goes back as far as the current deal (1999). The Daily Journal piece recaps some of the history and gets to the essence of the issue here
Still, the city could continue its current contract with the district, which it has accused of poor upkeep of the pool and “nickel-and-diming” the city. The district, on the other hand, has said the city is overusing the pool and the Burlingame Aquatic Club, or BAC, that operates the pool, is not doing a good job. The crux of the issue most recently, and $32,000 cost, was heaters that had gone out on the pool. The heater was replaced in February 2013, with the district installing state-of-the-art, energy-efficient Lochinvar heaters, according to the district.
“Close to day one, this pool has had a lot of problems,” said Parks and Recreation Director Margaret Glomstad. “There’s going to be a sizable commitment to fix some of the problems (deck, equipment and updates to changing rooms).”
Another possibility is changing the terms of the contract. Currently, the city and district divide capital costs 50/50. The district’s use of the pool is minimal, with it using the pool about 10 percent of the time, according to an independent audit by the district.
They are going to have to work out the cost-sharing or stop some programs because my sense of the community resolve is that there isn't enough support to go buy land and build another, all-city-owned pool anywhere in town. There might be an option to get a similar sharing ageement built into one of the big projects that are floating around town, but a 100% city-owned project wasn't on the overstuffed priority list to begin with and won't cut it with the voters.