TWIN LAKES, Wis. — A $300,000 park improvement project championed by Aquanut Water Shows, Inc. was abruptly canceled this week, just days after a local resident filed a lawsuit alleging the Village of Twin Lakes violated Wisconsin’s public bidding laws by partnering with the group.
The timing has raised eyebrows.
Aquanuts Treasurer Mark Gurda announced the group’s withdrawal during Monday night’s Village Board meeting, formally pulling the plug on a three-year plan to revamp Lance Park with new bleachers, improved lighting, shoreline stabilization, and an upgraded sound system.
“Given the challenges surrounding the park improvement proposal, we very regretfully must withdraw our offer to fund and execute these enhancements,” Gurda told the board.
The announcement came less than a week after Twin Lakes resident Bryan Neal filed a declaratory judgment lawsuit in Kenosha County Circuit Court. Neal argues that the Village’s arrangement with the Aquanuts — originally framed as a memorandum of understanding and later restructured into a lease — was an illegal attempt to skirt public bidding requirements.
In his remarks Monday, Gurda didn’t mention the lawsuit by name but acknowledged that what began as a “straightforward and collaborative proposal” had grown “more complex and challenging than anticipated.”
Sudden Shift
The Aquanuts’ decision to back out marks a dramatic reversal. For months, they had touted the project as a gift to the Village and a benefit to all park users. Gurda emphasized the team’s long-standing record of contributing improvements to Lance Park — including upgraded electrical systems, public Wi-Fi, new signage, and expanded storage facilities — all completed at their expense and with Village approval.
He also listed a range of local organizations the group has supported through performances and donations, including the Twin Lakes Police Department, Food Bank, and Mac Fund.
The now-defunct proposal had relied on a $300,000 investment from the Aquanuts and included additional materials and labor donated by corporate sponsors. A $100,000 grant from the Clinton Family Fund was also in play — but contingent upon the Village committing matching funds for its own park improvements.
Village officials including President Howard Skinner and Trustees Aaron Karow and Kevin Fitzgerald had expressed support for the arrangement and the Aquanuts’ role in executing the construction. A revised lease-based agreement was discussed by the board Monday but not adopted.
Legal Fallout
Neal’s lawsuit alleges that the Aquanuts, as a nonprofit corporation, are not exempt from bidding requirements and that their improvements — regardless of eventual “donation” — constitute public construction subject to oversight. He claims the Village attempted to structure the project in a way that deliberately bypassed state statutes.
Gurda’s comments suggest the group no longer sees a path forward under the scrutiny.
He said the Aquanuts will return or decline any donations earmarked for the shelved project and redirect their focus to the organization’s core mission: promoting water safety, offering free ski shows and clinics, and supporting charitable causes.
“We look forward to your continued support as we carry on with our water ski shows, clinics, and fundraisers that have become a cherished part of Twin Lakes,” Gurda said.
The Village and Aquanuts have 20 days from the date of service to respond to the lawsuit in court.
.
.
.
.
16 Responses
Bravo!
Amazing what runs back into the shadows when the lights come on.😞
See below
… say if they are wrong.
I want this lawsuit to proceed. Let’s see if $300,000 of what was $400,000. total needed to be bid out ?
The village government portion was going to be bid out. The donated money could and should be spent any way those donating saw fit !!
I believe the lawsuit is without merit.
This needs to see a courtroom not go away because the aquanauts pulled out.
See below
Yes let the court rule on it.i asked someone about this and was told team had to respond. They can say it is a donation then they other guy can respond then to court bc something about a bench trial not jury judge decides. We will know if the the aquanut try not to have trial
Twin Lakes is just full of drug addicts anyway.
The Aquanuts quit on the Village because of “challenges” per the team spokesperson.
A 15 year exclusive use agreement (worth millions of dollars) of prime lakeshore land in exchange for a different block seating configuration will be a challenge to defend (in court) as a “donation” to justify no public bidding as Wisconsin law requires of municipal construction.
Regarding any “partnership” between the Aquanuts and the Village of Twin Lakes, the Aquanuts refused to truly partner and combine money with the village such that a unified construction blueprint could be drafted and publicly bid out as required by law.
Construction would have proceeded but for the Aquanuts demand the ski team alone perform or determine who would perform the above and below ground construction of the marque village lakeside amphitheater.
The incurious may lazily point a finger at the resident who raised his hand about illegality.
The final report of an Aquanut autopsy of what killed the project will find “We have met the enemy and he is us.” This was an Aquanut suicide, not a homicide.
Bryan Neal
Didn’t see any news coverage of a 15 year lease !
Or exclusively.
But if a team like this which needs a water front like this, that doesn’t charge admission to anyone and has a long history of youth involvement and competition, needs a place like this, how or where else can it be done ??
Pay rent ? Charge admission to support that rent. Concessions. Paid parking.
That’s a big rabbit hole created.
Is this truly about competitive bidding or is about power and control of a piece of property that is now deemed worth more for something else.
They’ve been there a long time. Now Just trying to make it a better overall experience.
Why was that not a good idea ??
Had the team pooled the money with the village, jointly drew up plans, and bid out so the lowest qualified bidder could be award the contract, which is municipal construction 101, none of this would have occurred.
… can’t local people and contractors just donate their time and equipment ?
Sweat equity !?!
Sounds like “citizen taxpayers” STEPPING UP” to save a lot of money for other village citizen taxpayers !!
Or did I miss something in the story I read elsewhere ?
Competitive Bidding ??
Sure. Ok. But as we ALL KNOW governments are not required ANYMORE to take the Lowest bidder. And here when you are obviously talking about lot of new materials being purchased, why couldn’t the materials be purchased with Village monies competitively at lowest bidder and the balance of the “non government monies” be “used” by the people and contractors that obviously are giving MORE than the money they may receive in return ?
The statement above that says it was the aquanauts that gave up quickly is telling.
Do they not know how to fight or did they not want to fight ?
Is this over ? If it is then why can’t it be figured out ?
There has to be more to the story.
Bet over-my guess is the clinton people wanted their 100 k money back. One of there board people is on the team not sure how to find this out.
… look this over and figure what it would cost start to finish with no donations.
I’ll bet it’s a lot more than $400.K
Which would prove the point
Way to ruin a great thing for our community Bryan. 🙄 god forbid they update and improve the park.
What a moron.
When I was a boy the late Melvin Garb, a very successful businessman, told me, “You have to spend money to make money.”
I don’t know definitively if this project is or isn’t a good idea or if the process was followed appropriately. All legitimate questions. But they don’t exist in a vacuum. We have to look at a big picture.
Any cost/benefits analysis should consider the value of the Aquanuts to the community. This is a nonprofit organization that has been providing wholesome free entertainment to residents and visitors for many years. It’s more than that. It brings people to Twin Lakes who spend money in the community. It is positive public relations for the community in attracting quality businesses and residents. Moreover, it is a recreational and artistic opportunity for young people and families. Something that gives kids something to do and keeps them out of trouble.
Nothing wrong with inquiring about the cost involved but the inquiry must also consider the value of this organization in crunching the numbers.
If this resident lived in Pennsylvania he would block every Amish barn build as a zoning violation and sue his neighbors to not help.
Any volunteer fireman or EMT should note the name of the complainer just in case you donate your time and services when he is in need. You might get sued for trespassing. Congrats to the self serving clown who desires finding a way to make his life matter by taking down volunteers who do so much for the community.
It seems like it would have been a free thing for all those in Twin Lakes. Yeah, I want to see how this plays out in court too.