SOUTH HAVEN, Mich. — No lifeguards have been posted at one South Haven beach since 2001.
Councilors have considered reviving the lifeguard program, but on Monday, some of them admitted those conversations haven't come close to helping find a solution.
That’s despite the south beach’s popularity as a summer travel destination.
"This is always one of the prime locations for us when we were on spring breaks and vacation," says David Vesey, a former Paw Paw resident.
What’s not as popular is the local safety standard when it comes to lifeguards, or a lack thereof.
"You're trying to do something with the flags but you need a person," contends visitor Mary Hill.
In the 40 years when the lifeguard program was active, there was one drowning and no lawsuits. Since it ended, there have been at least 12 drownings and three lawsuits, two of which are active.
Those numbers were discovered by the South Haven Beach Safety Committee, which voted against reinstating the program in 2021.
"If they really were worried about liability, they would look at those numbers and say, ‘Wow, we have a lot more lawsuits when we don't have lifeguards than when we do have lifeguards,'" says Bob Pratt, director of education for the Great Lakes Surf Rescue Project.
Pratt has voiced his frustration to South Haven city councilors for years.
On Monday, they met for a priorities workshop — with beach safety on the list.
"This is life and death. This is not an ice skating rink. This is not a pipe going underground,” says Joe Reeser, Ward 2 councilperson. “So I'm just trying to be extra cautious on something like this. I don't want to say no to a program that could save lives, and I don't want to say yes if we can't really pull this off and do it right."
Several concerns were still on the table. How many lifeguards would they hire, and where would they be?
Cost was another factor. The 2024–25 budget has $700,000 set aside to support a program, but that's much lower than estimates shared with City Manager Kate Hosier from the very companies who would provide such services.
"The cost would go up because you'd need to pay more to get that staffing,” says George Sleeper, Ward 3 councilperson. “If we don't want to pay that, then to me that sets the city up for a liability."
Some councilors recommended meeting with a qualified consultant, but apparently several experts have already reached out willing to help.
"I would like to take advantage of those offers so that we can have something that's independent and, again, thinking outside the box of how we can move forward because I just feel like we're stuck in the sand right now and I want to get this moving forward," says Mary Hosley, Ward 3 councilperson.
The lifeguard schedule was another aspect to consider. Would they work all seven days — or just a few select ones?
"I'd like to see you go face the mother of a child that drowns on an off day and tell me that's okay," says Reeser.
"Optimally, we would have lifeguards on the beaches at all times. But, you could argue the other side of that, that if we're deciding that a zero-lifeguard program is acceptable because you can only have five days of coverage instead of seven, and a drowning happens during that time, then what do you tell those parents?" asks Wendi Onuki, Ward 2 councilperson.
The full conversation lasted more than 40 minutes, and this was the ultimate conclusion.
"We're stagnant; we're going back and forth,” says Letitia Wilkins, Ward 1 councilperson. “I don't think this is the time to slam one another; we just need to figure out how to move forward."
Leaving the meeting, Hosier said she'll investigate three main items before the next one: an update on legal liability, an update on those two active lawsuits, and finding an expert who can make recommendations to the council. Once there's an update, we'll let you know.
Follow FOX 17: Facebook - X (formerly Twitter) - Instagram - YouTube
