News-Record.com

"A well-managed aquatic facility can offset costs by generating revenue."

Didn't they say the same thing about the coliseum (less the word aquatic)?

This sounds like a wonderful facility. So wonderful it should be built with private dollars.

These bond projects all sound so appealing when presented by their proponents. It's like going out and buying a $10,000 home theater system that I don't really need and paying for it with a credit card.

Vote no: if such a facility can offset costs with revenue then why aren't investors lining up to contribute? Why do taxpayers have to cover it?

Dan,
Your uninformed opinion on this is mind boggling.
Have you any idea how big swimming is in other towns? Are you familiar with soccer? If so, then you must have seen fields full of parents and children on weekends out at Bryan Park. The same thing goes for swimming. Heck, even Hillsborough has an aquatic center. Charlotte and Raleigh have fantastic facilities that stay full weeks on end all year long.
Are you one of the myopic right wingers who supported "W" getting all the tax dollars for a millionaire owned business--Texas Rangers, but refuse to vote for a bond to build an aquatic facility for competitive swimming?
As your child ages, we can hope that your Ebeneezer Scrooge mentality will soften. And before you start in on it, individuals cannot build aquatic facilities for year round use.
If you want Greensboro to be like your idyllic "Hooterville", then move to Randolph County.

Private money, please.

My former home town, across the mountain, made the same claim for an aquatic center years ago. They also claimed that they could not wait for private money to become available because the town next door was ahead of them and they might enjoy the benefits from the dollars created by swim meet attendees. It was another one of these deals of keeping up with the "Jones" i.e. the nearby towns. While some benefited from the center it soon became just another drain on the taxpayer. Today it is used mainly for high school swim teams and an occasional district or regional meet.
The town nearby had built a center with private money thus saving the tax payers from being flushed down the drain with the chlorine when the pool is cleaned. That facility is much more successful than the tax drain facility in my former hometown.
Some folks believe that just because it works in one place it will work for their town and get in a rush to gamble taxpayer money instead of obtaining private funding. Even Asheville, with their elitist, lofty ideal thinking turned down building an aquatic center with tax money as they were finally able to see how their infamous Civic Center is draining the coffers. So far there has been no rush by private investors to risk their money.

So Greensboro hang on to your money and let private investors take the risk and your kids will thank you years from now when they are not being sucked dry by yet another "white elephant".

"Your uninformed opinion on this is mind boggling."

Maybe Dan didn’t realize you were such an expert on bonds DD. By the way it seems that you missed and/or forgot to answer my last post on this topic and since you are the expert I have to ask once again: Since you stated from another thread: “Bonds do not = tax increase” explain to me how a government that sells half a billion dollars in bonds because they didn’t have half a billion are going to pay interest plus the half a billion when the bonds are due, without raising taxes.

My vote will be a resounding "NO!"

Let me explain why in the order that Jeannie presents.

1) A venue for physical activity for all folks, regardless of income. I don't believe it is my responsibility to pay for poor people's leisure activities. My children got their swim lessons at the YMCA. The most recent one ran me about $50 for 2 weeks of swim lessons. I could have given him the swim lessons myself and would have had I not been able to afford the $50. So now I'm supposed to subsidize people who want to swim but not pay. BTW, the cost of a day at the pool at City Lake Park is $3. If you can't afford $3 per kid, do like what we did when I was small. Hook up a hose to a sprinkler. You'd be surprised how much fun the kids will have.

2) Promotion of water safety, social connections, blah blah blah: Same answer. You can get that elsewhere without me paying for it.

3) A way to help kids stop being fat: There are plenty of activities available for kids. If they aren't going to get off their fat butts to go play outside, what makes you think they'll do it for a pool?

4) Economic benefit: See above. If the benefit was real, you wouldn't need me to pay for it. This goes is the "Yeah, right" pile.

There are indoor and outdoor pools all over Greensboro and the Triad. You can take your pick from the YMCA, to city ran pools, to local pools, to private pools. There are currently swim meets held at City Lake Park in High Point and at Lindley Park. I'm sure there are others. They seem to get along just fine there.

Yellowdog you left out one: "Greensboro's lack of facilities drives state and regional events of these organizations to Raleigh, Chapel Hill, Charlotte and Hillsborough." That is what I refered to as "keeping up or getting ahead of the Jones." In a more venacular tone it is akin to penis envy or breast envy, depending upon the sex of the one doing the envy.
So who cares if they make a few bucks a year on a swim meet. The question remains, what does it cost in the long run. Something that is often overlooked in the attempt to "keep up with the Jones".

You're right, Mr. Produce. You know what else? I bet we have a few things that they don't have in Hillsborough as well. I know they don't have a Yum-Yum's there.

As far as penis envy/breast envy, I have both. But that's another topic.

Wow!

It took all the way until the second post before George W. Bush was mentioned in response to a letter about a big swimming pool.

Too bad Halliburton doesn't have the contract to build swimming pools, then W would build a pool for everyone, just to help out his buddies. And he would obviously pay for it by going to every struggling, hard working middle class American and rob them. At gun point. All the excess he collected, after leaving us all destitute he would give to his crony's in Big Oil (tm), allowing them to continue their unjust, illegal and imoral war for oil.

Hell, as politically volitile as the swimming pool issue is, we better get Hillary's take on it.

No to bonds. I don't like the way the city/county/state spends the money that they steal from me every other day of the month. Why would I intentionally appropriate them more?

Can I add a new gas guzzlin' Tahoe for me to the bond referendum? This is the only way they'll get my vote.

Trish,
When communities invest in infrastructure that contributes to the quality of life, companies decide to locate there, people decide to move there, and the community grows. Along with the growth in population and jobs comes a growth in the tax base. That is simple economics. But unfortunately we have some uneducated politicians (call them consevatives) who have linked bonds to tax increases. One such politico was a fellow who won a seat several years back, on our county commissioners. Name escapes me right now, but he was a General Contractor with a comb over and later just gave in and went with "bald". Walt Cockerham! He went on the AM talk show and said that bonds were just tax increases. I called in and accused him of "pi_sing in the well he would have to drink from if elected". Sure enough, he later had to recant his words, but the damage had been done as evidenced by some of the posts here. Aren't you glad that the leaders of many years back, had the forethought to borrow money to build parks, libraries and schools? Opponents of bonds point to the coliseum as their justification, but that is a complex problem with simple explanations coming from simple minds. Winston-Salem beat Greensboro to the punch, because Greensboro had defeated two referendums on it. Had that not occurred, the story would be a much different one today. My Deacons would not be playing in a great facility, and Greensboro would have had the events calendar booked solid. Thanks to the shortsighted folks in Greensboro, that's what happened---the very short version.

Deacon, my post is not against aquatic centers, just publically funded ones. Go read again please. The LTE writer states that the revenues for the facility can offset the costs. That is my point, the idea sounds wonderful, but I would like to see some data on how this center can pay for itself, as I don't believe it for a minute. Why don't you spend some time finding the data to support this statement instead of boggling your mind?

As for other cities having centers and people spending their money elsewhere, I really don't care to keep up with the Joneses as MrP illustrates.

Please also tell me why individuals (or companies for that matter) cannot build aquatic facilities also? They build golf courses, tennis facilities, boat marinas, airports, etc.

Swanks, if you have read Deacon's posts before, it is nearly impossible for him to make a statement without mentioning Bush, even though the subject matter has nothing to do with Bush. Doesn't matter. It's just a symptom of Bush Derangement Syndrome and cannot be cured.

Dan,

Do you support the Texas Rangers having $300 million in tax free bonds being issued for their stadium? Bush said it was for the economic benefit of the town, and sold it that way. I would take an aquatic center in Greensboro that did not benefit millionaire owners over the Texaas Rangers getting me to subsidize their "private" business venture. That is corporate welfare, but of course most conservatives claim helping rich people is good for everyone! LOL!

What's worse, helping an unemployed person buy groceries, or helping the owners of a professional baseball team by building them a stadium? Welfare vs. corporate welfare?

What would Jesus do?
According to your "deranged" view of Bush, Jesus would go after Gay people marrying and those evil flag burners! You have a great term in BDS, but it actually applies to those of you who support this man come hell or high water. So next time you talk of "Bush Derangement Syndrome" just realise you are talking about YOU!

DD, Jesus ain't got nothing to do with building an aquatic center or anything else on the agenda that was being discussed. Surely you got something better to do than to resort to such ignorant basis for argument. There is no basis for your remark or argument.
As for Bonds they are good for many things, aquatic center is just not one of them. Schools are in running for bonds since they serve more than a segment of the population.

I go with Dan on your doing some research on the subject. I've seen it and it don't work. Bonds might build it but the taxpayers windup supporting such a venture as a general rule especially for something of this nature. Private money is the way to go for such "niceties".

Oh, and another couple of things, Greensboro ain't Dallas/ FtWorth, an aquatic center is not a baseball stadium. Greensboro does well to attract the ACC tournment. An aquatic center can serve how many? Ameriquest Field serves how many and is how big?
A bit of information on the subject so one can compare a paltry maybe half useful aquatic center to something that actually pays it way: Oh just one other thing, the statdium and complex of 270 acres only cost 191 million , not 300 million as you stated. So good guess but no cigar.

Built in 1994. Now called Ameriquest Field in Arlington. The baseball facility is the center of a 270-acre complex which solidifies Arlington, Texas as an entertainment giant in the Southwest.( NOTE 270 acres which ain't exactly a small space especially located where it is)

Ameriquest Field in Arlington, completed in just 23 months,( WHAT YOU WANT TO BET IT WOULD TAKE LONGER THAN THAT TO BUILD A AQUAITC CENTER IN G'BORO) It is a 49,115 seat open-air ballpark.

It also includes a baseball museum, a children's learning center, and a four-story office building within the ballpark and a youth baseball park, a 12-acre lake, and parks and recreation space on the perimeter. Total cost of the project was approximately 191 million dollars as noted above.

So yea, I guess I would support a venture on something like that IF, I lived in Dallas/FtWorth where the market will support such a venture.
As we know the market doesn't even support a civic center in G'boro and why would one think that an aquatic center would be profitable or heck even a break even situation.

Good info MrP. After I read Deacons last post but before I read yours, I thought to myself, what the heck does a stadium in Texas and Jesus have to do with an aquatic center in Greensboro? What does an aquatic center in Greensboro have to do with helping an unemployed person buy groceries?

Then he jumps into gay marriage and flag burning. What does that have to do with an aquatic center in Greensboro?

By the way Deacon, you conveniently dodged my question. Why can't an individual or corporation build an aquatic center? If it were such a money maker the developers would be all over it. Where are the stats to support the LTE writers statement that a well managed aquatic center can offset costs by generating revenue?

Stick to the topic and leave Bush, Jesus and gays out of it.

It's typical bait and switch without a valid supporting argument, so typical that I come to expect it and am humored by it.

Produce,
Go back to being a "Secret Agent" and leave the cutting and pasting to neoCon. You made my point exactly, by saying you WOULD support governement sponsored facilities for millionaire sports team owners. You are such a hypocrite.

I wouldn't support the baseball stadium. I consider that to be a 'nicety' also. I don't see it as being good for the entire community. Much like the coliseum, it is good for those who can afford to pay for the parking and admission to attend.

Neither aquatic centers or baseball fields are going to put groceries in an unemployed person's fridge. That's what unemployement, food stamps, section 8, etc do.

Personally, when it comes to sports and other nicities, I think they should ALL be built with private money. However, if such an investment would create a positive financial return for the government (and taxpayers), I say go for it. I just don't see that the aquatic center will do that. Nor do I see the necessity of it.

And you DD are again an idiot for ASS Uming something with out reading the entire context. I said that in a case such as Dallas/FtWorth where the initive can be supported and the outcome profitiable that I would support such a measure. A dang long shot from just supporting something without haveing some grounds for support. Try reading a bit better DD. Oh and by the way did you also note your GLARING errors or did you simply ignore them as you normally do when proven wrong which is usually more often than not. Go back the organ grinder DD.
You know it is such a shame that you can not tolerate someones success. Could it be because your success is lacking? If I had anything to base any success on that you have had I would be congratulating you and wishing you the best in the future whether it be in continued work or in retirement. Green is not a good color for you DD.

YD, note that the Baseball facility in Arlington is much more than just a baseball field. It includes 270 acres and has great recreational facilities for all the community not just baseball fans. But then DD would have you beleive that it is nothing more than just a baseball field built for the wealthy few who can afford to attend. I would have to ask DD if he has ever even been to Arlington much less to a baseball game there.