It was said at a recent Council meeting that the primary reason
we are building an aquatics center is for competition. I disagree.
The purpose of the aquatics center is to serve the 35,000 men,
women and children of this community.
It was said at a recent Council meeting that the primary reason we are building an aquatics center is for competition. I disagree. The purpose of the aquatics center is to serve the 35,000 men, women and children of this community.
Our primary goals should be to teach our children how to swim and instill upon them the benefits of lifelong aquatic activities and to insure their water safety. I’ve become concerned that resources have been wrangled away to promote competitive wants at the expense of this community’s recreation needs.
What started out as an aquatics center for Morgan Hill has grown into a regional center at a cost of $13 million and growing to $18 million. I believe this far and away exceeds the wants and wishes of this community and what it can afford. Its intent as currently designed is to attract a significant number of non-residents and conduct competitive events often to the exclusion of the residents who funded the center.
The community as a whole has greater needs and rights to programs and funding than the few who play, for example, competitive water polo.
The size of the center, as planned, added to the water features to be incorporated into the new recreation center exceeds this community’s needs; it also exceeds this city’s ability to financially support it. The facility is bigger than we need but far too small to be a true regional center in the likes of San Jose’s Raging Waters.
At its current design, the deficit at the aquatic center could be $300,000 annually and it will surely be much more when capital maintenance costs are included, and even more when ancillary support services from police, fire, public works and City Hall are realized. These are costs that were not included. Therefore according to a study, the city must advertise and aggressively market the regional aspects of the center to attract many from out of town.
The City of Gilroy must love what we are doing. We are building a swim center for them as well and they did not have to contribute a dime. Consider this, if we have to market to other cities, why are we building at all? If anything, we should have approached surrounding agencies and truly built a regional center with others sharing that cost.
We recently approved additional millions for this project and we don’t know as of yet from where it’s coming. Some have mentioned flood control (gasp!), park maintenance, etc., and that would be a mistake. Some would argue that if we take a business approach it would succeed. That’s also a mistake. We are a municipality. We do what we’re supposed to do and businesses do what they do. We have lost sight of that.
Such developments like the aquatics center in its present design are best suited for private enterprise and if they are not doing it, you have to ask why. I believe we’ve crossed the line and assumed great risk.
I have no interest in filling our hotels with out-of-town visitors as mentioned or any of the claimed tourist benefits of such a regional center. If the city were to capture $1 from everyone at a competitive event, we would have to host 30 events days per year at 10,000 each day to fill the predicted shortfall listed in The Times. The Aquatics Foundation predicted that a singular competitive event could earn $400,000, yet the four municipal pools the city’s consultant brought forth for comparison all lost money. Go figure. Such arguments are often inflamed by special interests, civic pride, optimistic projections and the sort of mentality that lends itself to a frenzy of poor decisions and ultimately failed projects.
I am also not interested in using any additional RDA funding or taking such funding away from other needed projects (fire, water, roads, new recreation and senior center) to fund that, which would benefit the few and the elite. We’re over-extended says the city manager from a quote in The Times, and I would agree.
I am interested in projects that serve this community. I am interested in you and me and the needs of our families. I am interested in providing affordable recreation activities for all of Morgan Hill and just for Morgan Hill at a level we can sustain without requiring support from other cities and even states. That is the only viable and risk-free option. Unfortunately we seem to be building a center to meets the wants of self-interests at the expense of others.
Though there might be a contingent of vocal and enthusiastic residents in Council chambers, 34,000 are still at home, trusting good judgment and equal representation. I am hopeful Council will vote and approve projects that are always in the community’s best interests that are financially sound and public approved. If Council is ever confused, it’s time to circulate amongst others in the community to determine true wants and needs.
The reality is a world that has come to a screeching and painful financial halt, and the premise that formed the basis for all the optimism for revenue has all but disappeared. The world around us is correcting itself, a paradigm shift, and yet this city appears to be living in the dot.com world, believing in an endless stream of out-of-town dollars.
Build it and they will come says the movie. But that is not reality. Reality would have us build to scale, for this community alone, to meet our recreation needs first and foremost and plan for future growth if growth is needed. If anyone would argue differently, just look at the stock market, the unemployment rate, actions taken by the state and businesses like World Com., Enron and recently Time-Warner with its staggering $100 billion loss. It’s a different world out there and our municipal projects must reflect that world or we stand to lose that we build and jeopardize that we have.
