I have mixed feelings in writing about local concerns when our
country is at war and our troops are in harm
’s way. Community concerns seem so insignificant by comparison.
I pray each day for the lives of the men and women in the armed
forces and for their families at home. My thoughts and prays are
with them each and every day and each and every hour.
I have mixed feelings in writing about local concerns when our country is at war and our troops are in harm’s way. Community concerns seem so insignificant by comparison. I pray each day for the lives of the men and women in the armed forces and for their families at home. My thoughts and prays are with them each and every day and each and every hour.
My heart goes out to the Iraqi people and the men, women, and children in this desert nation who by no choice of their own find themselves in the midst of human conflict. I pray for a swift conclusion, and the return of peace to the world.
We make choices in this country and we make choices here locally. Most of them lately have been difficult especially when there are so many wants but limited resources. Where do you draw the line? A 50-meter pool as lovely as it is does not serve the general population nor does it serve this community’s greatest need. It dominates the construction site of the new aquatics center in both size and cost (millions), requires regional support (significant number non-residents), will more than likely be too deep to support youth swim lessons and will require a substantial annual subsidy.
Smaller pools for lessons and water recreation features are what this city needs. They are less costly and can be open all year round for lap swim and exercise. Fees to support them will be less, allowing more residents to access programs. A facility with one less pool (the competition pool) is the only model the city can economically sustain while building other needed recreation projects and providing other vital services.
A letter written by Gino Acevedo assures the public that our interests have been considered. Yet having a committee filled with pro-aquatic advocates in my mind is no assurance that our interests are protected and the community at large is best served. As Gino justifies the process, he fails to list its outcomes – financial constraints, the loss of annual dollars, weekend closures for competitive events during prime summer months, and the many non-residents needed to support the program.
Gino has said before this council that the focus of the 50-meter pool is and should be competition, and when council considered a shallow end to accommodate youth swim lessons, Gino spoke out how this would affect and prevent water polo games. It is difficult not to think that Gino advocates spending our millions so that he can have a competitive pool to meet his own recreation pursuits.
Can anyone justify the commitment of millions for a project that benefits so few and place other projects at risk? Such is the financial situation in relation to all of these RDA projects that Councilman Greg Sellers is proposing a recreation parcel tax to further subsidize such activities. How can we support such a tax that benefits so few and many non-residents? How can we support such a tax when all our other taxes are about to increase and our own economic condition is uncertain and safety services are threatened?
The question can not be subsidy or not but what could you do with those subsidized dollars estimated to be $300,000 annually for this project alone.
Some $250,000 and more helps build a third and needed fire station, supports the construction of a senior center and an indoor sports center. A quarter million annually completes and maintains Butterfield Boulevard and builds other roads, adds a linear park along little Llagas Creek, drills wells for clean water, preserves our precious open space, adds a new ball field, serves children-at-risk and supports police and fire protection. A quarter million or more helps build and sustain other vital programs for which each and every one of us can benefit. A quarter million annually or more for competitive water polo and non-residents can not make sense in light of other pressing needs and much higher priorities.
Our 34,000 residents have far greater rights to those dollars and services than the few.
Though Gino suggests that everyone is supportive of the center, this is not true. Planning Commission members with whom I have spoken with are not supportive. Council members Steve Tate and Hedy Chang voted recently to delay the project. Other residents with whom I have spoken are not supportive. The Parks and Recreation Commission did not deem it as a high priority. A delay is the prudent thing to do in light of the greatest financial crisis in California since World War II.
I believe council does not have this community’s support when the alternatives, risks and benefits are placed before the public. Given the choice which would the public select – a fire station, senior center, parks, police services, youth programs or a competitive water polo program serving non-residents? Which project out of all those identified should be built first? Which choice would best meet the public’s need? What would you do in light of this longterm crisis and our country at war?
We can support/afford a swim center built to scale that accommodates lessons, exercise and water recreation activities. Only after gauging community support for water sports and after other facilities have been built around a stable economy should we consider a venture into the more costly and subsidized competitive program – a program that many of our neighboring and peninsula cities are currently unwilling to support. In fact the city hired consultants had to search other parts of the state (none locally) to find project comparisons – all of which lose hundreds of thousands of dollars annually.
City is obligated to build other promised facilities for adults, youths, and seniors. The focus of competitive programs and the cost of a competitive pool can and will jeopardize these and other projects. In fact the RDA pool of construction dollars is depleted/allocated, and the City is borrowing from other funds for additional support. This is not what the public approved and Council has exceeded its promise to build with in the stated RDA budget. While we are building in excess, the city has severely cut costs and is currently dipping into reserves to sustain just what we have. When the City Manager asks Council, “Where is the money going to come from?” It’s an ominous question that should do more than just raise our concern but raise our attention once again to the potential risks that once forced this city to layoff public safety officers, sell our fire department, and close down recreation entirely. Who can support projects that would place all of this at risk?
As the past aquatics coordinator for the City of Sunnyvale years ago (five pools, staff of 60, pop. 130,000), I value and understand aquatic programs, but there are economic realities and other obligations that must be considered. With a little less, we can do more. The facility jewel that Gino describes will certainly be a jewel even without the competitive pool. With the little diamonds, rubies and emeralds we will save, we can string a fine bracelet of community projects that we can sustain, that everyone can share.
If Gino and others truly have the community’s interest at heart, there would be agreement and support to delay the project for at least a year as proposed by Council Members Tate and Chang until this crisis and this war have passed. It’s the American thing to do and the right thing to do for Morgan Hill.
Mark Grzan is a Morgan Hill resident who has been active in city government. The Board of Contributors is comprised of local writers whose views appear on Tuesdays and Fridays.
