News-Record.com

What this community really needs is (1) a first-rate cage fighting venue, and (2) some LTE that make basic sense.

Because Michael Phelp's real performance got him the SI award, everybody can overcome "personal preference" and benefit from a meet at an already-existing pool where everyone can be a last-place "winner"?

I'm thinking of taking up Polo but there are no public Polo fields in Greensboro. I'd prefer it to be centrally located and there's plenty of room at Country Park if we filled in the lake. Please consider my feelings and help to make this a reality.

The $12m that will be spent on a seasonally available pool would have been better spent renovating an existing building to make a "club" for teens, a place for all year round. There is no place for teens to go here in Greensboro. We already have several pools. Or better yet $12m could have been spent to create another homeless shelter since so many are without jobs and loosing their homes. A pool was one of the worst wastes of money that was voted in this election.

post thought: I wonder just how many times those 500 swimmers and their families will have to come here and spend their money to make the $12m back that we spent to give them this glorious pool to compete in?

Guilford County doesn't have enough money to provide basic services to its citizens, much less waste it on something that should just wait until better economic times. Guilford County should concentrate its money on education, law enforcement, mental health, and reducing homelessness.

The pool is a boondoggle.

Good post panacea, wait till better economic times. That's too logical. Using the pool bond logic, if I lost my job I should take a cruise around the world!!

"Everyone needs a venue to demonstrate their expertise..."

And it's governments' responsibility to provide the venue, of course. Especially for shockingly pool-less Guilford county.

So far as I know, we truly don't have a jai alai court.

Or anywhere to ice climb.

Or a public rifle range.

Get with it, government.

444, The "already existing pool" is a 50 year old outdoor venue open about 3 months, in need of repair and updating, which is too long and requires bulkheads for long course meets. I guess you could be referring to the two other indoor (25 yard, short course) facilities around 30+ years old, also in need of repair/update and seat about 100 spectators on metal bleachers. Thankfully there was some money in the bond for some of those issues as well.

Hugh, Get several hundred polo players with 3 or 4 differant organizations practicing every day (sometimes twice a day) for hundreds of hours a week at private and public facilities, travel to Hillsborough, Huntersville, Kernersville and Winston for your "home mathes", get high schools to have polo teams (with only two public facilities available for practice and games), have hundreds of swimmers and families come to antiquated and near obsolete facilities for 50+ years, get a couple thousand kids to have summer polo leagues (ages 5-19) for 50 years, have a City Tournament with a couple thousand kids, help finance the only two high school facilities, wait 20 years, make two very well thought out bond package proposals, have them both roundly defeated then throw a third one up and hope for the best. Hey it's worked before!

noname, Your wiillful ignorance of the situation shows very clearly. The new facility is to be a public, indoor, year round facility. How do you NOT know that by now. Please pay attention before you whine. Please name our "several pools" for me while you are at it. At least the pool will create some moola for the city coffers through economic benefits. No one ever said it would pay for itself but "help" pay... YES! Economic impact seems like voodoo to me but at some level it is very real. I know we spend a lot in other towns/cities.

Panacea, City Council has already said we would wait for a better local economy before starting the pool project. You really dont read this paper do you?

Dan, I really thought you paid better attention to issues you pretend to care about. See above

Rbennet, See "hugh" above. Plus,
Your examples are just plain silly (as is polo). An aquatic center can be used in many ways by many individuals and groups. And, if run well will be as busy as P&R wants it to be.

If you guys would stick with your real principles I could respect that. But your headless, mindless meandering, silly comparisons to polo, jai lai, ice climbing are just stupid and insulting.

Thanks for the constructive criticism, Mick. I'll quote the LTE again. Hopefully you can, ahem, "pay better attention" or "read this (thread)":

"Everyone needs a venue to demonstrate their expertise..."

I was pointing out exactly how ridiculous that statement is, and gave examples. Thanks for agreeing. And you completely avoided the point of my post. My "real principles," as you gently put it.

(hint- second sentence, directly after quote)

FWIW, you made your best non-attack statements here:

1- "No one ever said it would pay for itself"

2- "...make two very well thought out bond package proposals, have them both roundly defeated..."

People might actually have a discussion over those.

Mick : list of pools, besides Lindley Park there is
Hagan Stone Park (Camp Joy) Peeler Annie Williams, Warnersville, Grimsley, Smith high school and Smith Senior Center. Yes, they may be in need of renovation but so does the courthouse, jail, mental health facility, and many others that do more to serve our community than a pool.

I don't believe I am whining I just think that the money could have been better spent on our citizens that are in so much need right now.

So this new pool is supposed to be public and year round, if you don't have the money to pay to get in to swim , then it is just for the privledged to use (those that can afford it) . Are they going to provide free entry for under privledged kids? Don't try to come back with " it's only a few dollars to get in to swim anybody should be able to afford it" there are alot of kids out there whose parents are living on the edge of poverty and struggling to put food on the table, there are no extra "dollars" for them to spend on going swimming. If you don't believe that then I submit that your are living in a dream world, with your head in the sand.

Just how many people make use of a swimming pool in the winter anyway. I used to go to Smith high school pool through the winter and most times we were the only ones in the pool !!

So let me get this straight "the revenue is supposed to help pay for it" who is going to pick up the rest of the tab? Us poor working stiffs that will never use the facility.

This pool will be used by a chosen few, and in my opinion still a waste of taxpayer money when there is so much more urgent need for such things as a new jail, homeless shelters, assistance for the poor, a decent place for teens to gather and enjoy themselves without worry of being shot or raped or worse, the list goes on. But I see no urgent great need for a new pool.

Mick : list of pools, besides Lindley Park there is
Hagan Stone Park (Camp Joy) Peeler Annie Williams, Warnersville, Grimsley, Smith high school and Smith Senior Center. Yes, they may be in need of renovation but so does the courthouse, jail, mental health facility, and many others that do more to serve our community than a pool.

I don't believe I am whining I just think that the money could have been better spent on our citizens that are in so much need right now.

So this new pool is supposed to be public and year round, if you don't have the money to pay to get in to swim , then it is just for the privledged to use (those that can afford it) . Are they going to provide free entry for under privledged kids? Don't try to come back with " it's only a few dollars to get in to swim anybody should be able to afford it" there are alot of kids out there whose parents are living on the edge of poverty and struggling to put food on the table, there are no extra "dollars" for them to spend on going swimming. If you don't believe that then I submit that your are living in a dream world, with your head in the sand.

Just how many people make use of a swimming pool in the winter anyway. I used to go to Smith high school pool through the winter and most times we were the only ones in the pool !!

So let me get this straight "the revenue is supposed to help pay for it" who is going to pick up the rest of the tab? Us poor working stiffs that will never use the facility.

This pool will be used by a chosen few, and in my opinion still a waste of taxpayer money when there is so much more urgent need for such things as a new jail, homeless shelters, assistance for the poor, a decent place for teens to gather and enjoy themselves without worry of being shot or raped or worse, the list goes on. But I see no urgent great need for a new pool.

Mick : list of pools, besides Lindley Park there is
Hagan Stone Park (Camp Joy) Peeler Annie Williams, Warnersville, Grimsley, Smith high school and Smith Senior Center. Yes, they may be in need of renovation but so does the courthouse, jail, mental health facility, and many others that do more to serve our community than a pool.

I don't believe I am whining I just think that the money could have been better spent on our citizens that are in so much need right now.

So this new pool is supposed to be public and year round, if you don't have the money to pay to get in to swim , then it is just for the privledged to use (those that can afford it) . Are they going to provide free entry for under privledged kids? Don't try to come back with " it's only a few dollars to get in to swim anybody should be able to afford it" there are alot of kids out there whose parents are living on the edge of poverty and struggling to put food on the table, there are no extra "dollars" for them to spend on going swimming. If you don't believe that then I submit that your are living in a dream world, with your head in the sand.

Just how many people make use of a swimming pool in the winter anyway. I used to go to Smith high school pool through the winter and most times we were the only ones in the pool !!

So let me get this straight "the revenue is supposed to help pay for it" who is going to pick up the rest of the tab? Us poor working stiffs that will never use the facility.

This pool will be used by a chosen few, and in my opinion still a waste of taxpayer money when there is so much more urgent need for such things as a new jail, homeless shelters, assistance for the poor, a decent place for teens to gather and enjoy themselves without worry of being shot or raped or worse, the list goes on. But I see no urgent great need for a new pool.

I see and true enough.

Personally, I do not see the pool facility as a true need for the community. What "park" is? Are marinas needed at city lakes? baseball fields, soccer? No not truly needed. They are essential to the sports/activities involved but not needs as most roads, schools, fire, police, etc are. Very debatable subject overall. More eloquent participants might define parks, pools, marinas, sports fields etc as a "need" or the food necessary for a city/community to survive or thrive. Perhaps debatable but not certainly not patently false.

Across the country, most large, indoor pools (particularly ones able to host competitive meets) are municipally owned. There is an unfortunate but very real reason for that. Pools do not generally make good private businesses. Same as any "park", ball field, etc. Also, private business type pools do not reap the rewards of economic impact as municipally owned pools do. A secondary income stream if you will.

If pools, CVM, Auditorium, etc were credited with the tax dollars they create then all would have much more impressive "books". Certainly closer to "even". Many facilities, sports or other, are traditionally municipally owned for this very reason.

All that being typed, there is a very real quality of life issue here. This pool is not all about competitive swimming, practices and meets, etc. The P&R will offer numerous health and safety programs, public swim, aerobics, etc. Something many opponents oft ignore... just like the income brought in by visitors.

I supported this project because I think the facility will indeed offer much to the community in general and it will allow swimming (competitive and recreational) the room required for expansion and outreach. Care to believe it or not this pool will get all the use P&R wants.

I do respect those who oppose the facility for fiscal reasons. The arguements there are not w/o merit. But I tire of the near constant and completely inadequate comparisons you and others made above. Or folks acting/believing that the existing facilities are adequate for a town of our size.

sorry for the multiple posts guys, typekey is giving me a fit this morning and would not post

"jai lai, ice climbing "

Yeah! Now we are talking.

Response to the above,

1. Swimming is the number 1 recreation in the US as defined in numbers of people participating.

2. Swimming facilities have been under the city Park and Recreation for 50 years or more. Polo and target shooting although important are rather small activities and not included under the P & R auspice.

3. The proposed facility will be open to the public and includes fitness, wellness and therapy, water safety, learn to swim, high school swimming and many other programs. Participants will be seniors, infants, those learning to swim, young adults and others.

4. The participation numbers will be similar to Pullen Park in Raleigh and Mecklenburg County Aquatic Center in Charlotte. Both publically funded and managed by P & R. The facility will be used everyday by many groups and indvivduals. Both the Raleigh and Charlotte facilities are well used by the public. Both cities are funding more public pool facilites.

5. There will be a sizeable economic benefit to the community by hosting 10 to 20 large swimming events per year, drawing participants from the state and nation.

6. The proposed facility and services addresses the serious epidemic of obesity. This faciltiy may be teamed with our larger health care providers, so to provide programing for the those recovering from injuries and diseases.

I hope this provide some clarification.

Go Molly... Go Molly... Go Molly

NoName: You will not find me arguing that we do not have more pressing needs. BTW: Im sure you know the jail bond passed AND the City Council has delayed any movement on the pool facility. I find your desire for teen activity admirable and we are in agreement. Just a thought on my part: sports activities count toward that end. Do you agree? Ball fields, pools, affordable sports leagues are good outlets for kids.

You will find as I have always found... transportation is a huge issue with some communities wether that is getting to and from practices, meets, games or publically funded "teen hang outs".

Seems teen hang outs might more easily be funded privately or as a partnership with govt. If you attempt to have public funds used to that end... count me in as a supporter.

Mick says: "I supported this project because I think the facility will indeed offer much to the community in general..."

I pondered the intense interest on Mick's part for the pool. There had to be a personal reason, other than it "offering much to the community", and I found it.

"As a swim dad, I still hurt over the original “natatorium” defeat even though my daughters swim career was in its infancy."

"Our pools will PROBABLY hold up for my daughter’s remaining career (15/sophomore) but if I were the parent of a young swimmer I would really be worried about the future of the sport in this City/County if the bond fails."

Look familiar Mick?

http://www.hoggsblog.com/?p=2352

I don't doubt you have an interest in the community as a whole Mick, but it's obvious your kid's swimming career was a motivator.

You may want to disclose your personal motivations in the future.

Forgot this one:

"Now we can proceed with location, etc. Personally I would like to see some area foundations, rich folks, corps, etc step up and augment the bond money and provide the City with a near first class facility. We shall see how it all plays out. I am happy with the result and somewhat surprised. I just hope my daughter gets to race in the thing someday."

I agree, fine points, molly. Go indeed.

May I? I don't think I'll need more than numbers 1 and 2:

Since rifle ranges and polo clubs manage to exist and are, by your post, "important but rather small," how then can "the number 1 recreation in the US" not manage to find a way to fund itself?

Ta-dah.

One of the better debates around here - good points made by all. Just wondering, is the aquatic facility the type of "shovel ready" project that Obama & Congress are itching to fund to stimulate the economy? Perhaps they could satisfy everyone, given the federal stimulus $ will be spent somewhere either way.

Look, I voted for the pool because my daughters swim and I'm willing to pay for it. As long as voters are willing to pay for pretty much anything, mainly because most of them aren't paying very much, I'd just as soon get a pool that will save me a drive or two to Hillsborough. And complaints from illiterates who couldn't (or didn't) read the ballot are absurd.

That said, this letter still doesn't make sense; the pool is still pretty much a luxury for the bourgeosie; and it will still cost money, not make it, in the long run.

444, I dont see the pool as a "luxury" per se but nor do I see it as a "need". It has been an interesting debate in that regard. I agree that a pool or any "park" will never truly make money but at least this facility will contribute to the coffers of the tax payers in some way. Glad your kids swim or truth be known play any sport. Good for em.

Korn, I wish. As exposed by Dan' super sleuthedness I hope for State, Fed or private $$$ to augment/offset upgrades, operating costs, programming, etc.

Dan, I suppose this is supposed to be some kind of GOTCHA moment. But sadly it is not. You didnt have to search elsewhere to find posts by me as there are plenty here and at AJs in regard to the bond(s). Voted for most bonds this time around with or w/o personal reasons or involvement. I was unaware we are to list past blog posts, personal reasoning, kid's hobbies, etc prior to giving opinions. I will definitely remember that and hold you to it as well.

My daughter is a sophomore in HS. Even if digging had begun 11/05/08 odds are against her training in the facility. Maybe, just maybe IF she swims in college and IF the facility is completed she might train there (over Christmas or summer). Maybe even compete in the thing in college... who knows. Those insidious quotes you "dug up" sort of indicate that as well. So your silly theory is kinda shot. Your attempts at exposing and/or embarrassing me or whatever are woefully inadequate. I support the facility. I support youth swimming at all levels and ages, private or public. I was for this thing the first time before my daughter got involved in competitive swimming. I was for the second attempt and I am for it now though she will certainly not swim there while in her HS years.

Rb, same same.... for many and varied reasons pools and parks do not make good private businesses. Most/Many (but not all) are indeed public.

Mick
Secret Society of Swim Parents
(you know the ones that "hid" the pool in the P&R bond and never reveal our true intentions when debating publically funded facilities)

No reason to get so defensive Mick and no gotcha intended. I was interested in info about this subject so I Googled 'Greensboro pool bond' and found several local blogs including hoggsblog.

You may not have read the sentence in my previous post regarding me not doubting you have an interest in the community as a whole.

My beef is that you come into this thread like a bull in a China shop belittling me, hugh, noname, and panacea, go on and on about the goodness this pool will be for the community, but conveniently omit the fact that you have a family member who could personally benefit this project.

I would be similar to me supporting the auditorium bond "for the good of the community", belittle anyone opposed, and omit the fact that my kid plays in the symphony.

It's great that your daughter enjoys competitive swimming and I wish her well in her endeavors, but why not just be up front like you were in hoggsblog? And why not have a spirited debate with those who disagree without statements like this? "noname, Your willful ignorance of the situation shows very clearly."

OK, Mick. You have a point that Parks and Rec is holding up on the pool due to the economy--due to the outcry. I did forget that part.

However, I also think the entire thing should be scrapped. The pool bond was snuck in dishonestly by sticking it deep into another bond after 2 resounding defeats as a stand alone measure. The public spoke loud and clear about the pool. Pool supporters snuck it in the back door.

In Congress, this is called an earmark aka pork.

If another bond for the pool alone comes up, and the voters approve it, then I will have no issue with building it.

But I hate sneaks. I feel the same way about this pool as I do Alaska's Bridge to Nowhere.

Government funding of selected industries and large projects started with Alexander Hamilton, a federalist and precursor to the Republican Party. He was far from a liberal and wasteful democrat classification, but understood economic benefits of government involvement in financing public projects for common good of its citizens.

Civilizations for centuries have allowed their governments to build projects to promote common good for its citizens. Highways, small community roads, sidewalks, libraries, public tennis and basketball courts, dams, sewers, public meeting spaces, parks and gardens, schools including athletic facilities, airports....and more.

Most if not all would have ever been privately financed, although there are a few that have been but largely by very wealthy benefactors. Large projects meant for broad public use require public financing. Governments through their elected officials and charters usually define the areas of public interest to promote and finance. The City Park and Recreation Department has defined parks and recreational facilities as part of their area of development and management oversight. Swimming pools have been part of P & R services for well over 50 years and may have started at the inception of the department. This pool proposal was included 10 years ago in the P & R plan put together by a citizen committee, and was accepted by the department and perhaps the city council. This plan has guided the department in its development of facilities. Other cities and counties have likewise included these facilities as projects for public use and funding. They include Charlotte, Raleigh, Augusta, Huntersville, Savannah, Clearwater, Nashville, Richmond and the list goes on.

There has been some disconnect in the community regarding the use of this pool facility, partly brought about by Allen Johnson’s editorials. He continues to label the facility as one to be used by few with limited benefits to the community. From the start this facility, programs and services were to be modeled after very successful examples; Mecklenburg County Aquatic Center (MCAC) and Pullen Park Aquatic Center. For those inquisitive people (leaving some journalist out), this website (http://www.charmeck.org/Departments/Park+and+Rec/Aquatics/Aquatic+Center+Information.htm) may explain the breath of use and benefits to a community. The exact daily participation can be provided by the manager of the facilities, but on most days these facilities are packed full of citizens of all ages. Daily usage ranges from 250 to 1000 plus per day week after week. Citizens are participating in wellness and therapy classes, learn to swim, senior exercise, general fitness, learn to swim programs, high school programs and competitive swimming. Ages range from 3 to 90 for the participants. Most of these programs are fee based. Large events will draw more than 3000 people per day to the facility.

Lastly, in addition to the public health (public health is a publicly funded and managed by the county and state) benefits to the community there is a sizeable economic impact generated by ten to twenty large events held at the facility each year. In the past there was a professional report put together illustrating the economic impact upon the community, but many including the N&R wished to ignore these numbers. Those who will receive the economic benefits, such as hotels, retail and food establishments, the workers employed and the municipalities that receive revenue from sales taxes, may not be the ones receiving the health benefits. Here in lies one of strongest reasons for public financing; the benefits are broad for a vast number of citizens. Public health, economic growth, and promotion of Greensboro as a family friendly city has for sometime been supported by its citizens and government.

Thanks for taking the time to read the above and we hope this helps clarify many of the misconceptions.

Thanks for making your case in a civil manner Molly the Dog.

Mick said: ". . . The "already existing pool" is a 50 year old outdoor venue open about 3 months, IN NEED OF REPAIR AND UPDATING, which is too long and requires bulkheads for long course meets. I guess you could be referring to the two other indoor (25 yard, short course) facilities around 30+ years old, ALSO IN NEED OF REPAIR/UPDATE and seat about 100 spectators on metal bleachers. Thankfully there was some money in the bond for some of those issues as well. [emphasis added]"

And therein lies part of the problem, Mick.

The City is negligent in not maintaining/repairing/updating City facilities on a regular basis. Too many times we are asked to vote on a bond for a "new" facility or a huge "renovation" (as in the Memorial Auditorium) which could have been avoided altogether or delayed for a much longer time had such facilities been well taken care of during each year of their existence.

I live in a house almost fifty-five years old and understand the necessity of annual budgeting (or being ready to give up something which is NOT a necessity) in order to pay for repairs or updating to maintain the integrity and useful life of my home.

Response to above,

Regarding the two small indoor pools, one is owned by the city and the other owned by Guilford County Schools. They have not been maintained, but neither have the schools. There is a problem with operating budgets not covering the annual maintenance of the facilities both for city facilities and county schools. This should be apparent to all.

The recent P&R bond has allocated some funds for repair of Lindley and Grimsley, but more needs to be commited over many years. Both of indoor pools have been closed recently due to federally mandated safety improvements. Lindley has serious structural problems that will require much attention soon.

Getting back to the point, the citizens and users of the facilities are the losers. More involvement is needed to assure the assets of the city and county are maintained. Lastly, repair of these facilities is paramount, but this still does not address the capacity problem. The new pool facility can be forstalled for a better economy, but citizens are seeking what most other cities provided 20 years ago.

Dan, fair enough criticisms. The first 7-8 posts were negative and contained misinformation and silly comparisons. I tire of the post bond vote BS and am frankly out of patience. This may be a relatively new issue to you but it is not for me. And as you can see from Panacea's post just above, AJs blog, recent LTE, etc I have reason to be defensive. You sure fooled me on the no "gotcha" intended. Shall we put it to a vote?

Fanatic, I have no arguement with your statements at all in this regard. Trust me here, the swim community has been fighting that fight for quite some time and has actually shared costs and contributed to our municipal pools greatly over time.

Panacea, You are just plain wrong. No matter how many times you say it was hidden it doesnt change the facts. The bonds were discussed here, AJs, Hoggs, other various blogs, TV2, TV14, TV8, News and Record, Yes! Weakly, Rhino Times, etc. Many times over! It was and is the lead item on the P&R website bond descriptions. There was a website in favor of the bonds (Action Greensboro I think) and all info was there. As for the write up on the actual ballot... it was no diff than all the others on the same ballot. Want proof... try google. Im not going to deny we (Secret Society of Swim Parents) took a differant tack this time around. We failed twice before by leading the charge. Why in the world would we do that again?! Besides, to be honest, I didnt think the thing stood a chance. This time we went with a more whatever will be ... will be attitude. It was in the P&R bond because that is where it belongs (always has). Did we think a pool had a better chance in a P& R bond... Hell Yes! That is where it should have been all along. P&R will operate and manage the facility. Most of the bonds were bundles. There was no secrecy. It wasnt hidden. We just didnt scream about it.

Not everybody in Guilford County blogs, Mick, or surfs the Internet on a daily basis like we do.

You do have a point: it is up to the voters to research items on the ballot before voting on them, and most people don't. Most people don't even really research major candidates--they just vote on emotion (case in point, the recent Presidential election).

However, you yourself admit that pool funding was put into another bond issue BECAUSE the two stand alone issues failed, "Did we think a pool had a better chance in a P& R bond... Hell Yes!"

You're right, it probably would have passed the first time had it been in a P&R bond. But it wasn't: twice. The voters made their wishes clear--twice. Pool supporters found a way around the will of the citizens of Guilford County to get what they wanted. Maybe you don't see it that way, but I do.

Maybe you're right, and pool supporters weren't trying to be sneaky and dishonest with pool funding.

But they created an appearance of impropriety that is sticking like glue, and instead attempting to resolve that, pool supporters get defensive.

Panacea,

Ok so not everybody blogs.... Again, TV2, TV8, TV14, N&R, Rhino, Yes!Weakly What is the excuse there? I know you would rather have seen it as a stand alone. In your words "But it wasnt". Other than "stand alone" what would you wanted to be done differently?

There's no maybe about not being sneaky. We were allowed to follow the path we always wanted. That apparently is our sin.

The only reason it sticks like glue is because folks like you have made up their minds and do not want to hear the other side. They would rather assume the worst as it makes it easier for them (you) to demonize the "rich, white, sneaky, elitists". In another post/thread didnt you say you didnt know a $12 million pool was in the P&R bond. Given all the info available.... please explain to me how that is my fault?

Yes, I get get defensive. Reread this thread and see if you can figure out why? I disagree that we created an appearance of impropriety by being allowed to bundle like most other projects this and other voting periods. You simply see something that isnt there. The only place the pool wasnt the lead description was on the ballot. But, the ballot (which we Sneaky Elitists didnt write) was written and handled exactly the same as the others on the ballot. How in the world is that sneaky?! We are treated the same for once and get branded as sneaky. It simply pisses me off.

Thanks for the posts, Molly. I really like the phrase "more involvement." I don't know that I've ever heard "money" called "involvement" before.

I'm asking this seriously- Which do you work for, the City, County, or State?

---

"If you guys would stick with your real principles I could respect that"

I've been, Mick, so please, begin. It's not the governments' responsibility to buy toys for your favorite game. And did I read correctly that we have a pool that is somehow *too long*? Wow. And how much do the temporary bulkheads cost to rent? Or do we already own them?

And some pools are too short?

Perhaps the public will be able to suggest names. My vote is for "Goldilocks." This one is just right...

But you won, and congratulations. It's a win for a twice-voted-down business that you've admitted is destined to become a money pit for taxpayers, but oh well.

One thing I hope the new pool can teach some youngsters is that nobody likes a sore loser, but sore winners are usually worse.

Back to the "real principles":

I'd love to see a hold on all failed propositions so that, if voted down, one can't be brought up again, in any form or under the cloak of any other proposal, for six years, and for twelve years by any of the same people involved the first time. And just to show we mean it, let's say that anyone who attempts to re-table something voted down under a different cloth would be immediately removed from his position and fined for attempting to undermine voter intent.

Half the Council? Fine.

Citizens of Greensboro have faith in the P&R department because they have delivered nice facilities and services to the community. Voters had more confidence in the pool proposal as presented by the P&R department rather than an independent project under unknown management. It was presented as a public facility meant for all citizens use offering various programs to all ages and citizens in the community.

The pool inclusion in the bond was well advertized and the P&R involvement drove confidence in the project, hence driving a favorable vote by the community.

Lastly, the P&R 20 year plan developed in 1998 included the facility. This was a public document available for all to read.

RBennet,

Sorry do not work for any government agency.

Mick: re "Ok so not everybody blogs.... Again, TV2, TV8, TV14, N&R, Rhino, Yes!Weakly What is the excuse there?"

Well, just so you know: there is no constitutional requirement that anyone read the newspaper or watch TV.

However, I do read the N&R: every day. And what I remember from the paper is the problems with the pool bond. I had no particular opinion on the pool itself. Asking the taxpayers to foot the bill, that I didn't like.

"Rich, white, or elitists" never passed my lips. Sneaky did though, and I still stand by it. Just like any earmark or pork barrel project, burying it in the details is exactly what pool supporters did with the P&R bond issue. They didn't write the bond, but they pressed to have the pool included.

Now, I wasn't aware that the P&R had building a new pool in their 20 year plan--thanks Molly. In better economic times, had it come first time around as a P&R project, I probably would have voted for it first time. Putting it in a bond issue THIS YEAR was pure poor judgment. Everyone who watches TV and reads any newspaper, or blogs, knew the economy was tanking and the county wasn't taking in enough money to pay the bills--that's why they wanted to raise the sales tax. You really shouldn't be surprised people are upset.

And if you can't see the appearance of impropriety, well. Christ could make a blind man see, but I can't.

Rb,

Yes Lindley is slightly too long (50+ meters). And sorry to disapppoint yet again but the bulkheads are privately owned by a local private swim club. I believe the previous wooden ones were too. Could be wrong though. So are the scoreboards. Some of the starting blocks are owned by The Community Swim Association as well. We actually all work together on several events, meets and issues. Nice how that works huh?

Sore - Winner? I only speak out in defense. It is you and others here that compare our efforts to jai lai, ice climbing, riflery (no offense affecianados of those sports intended) and make accusations of deceit and dishonesty. How is defending one's integrity construed as being a sore winner?

I dont have a problem with your waiting period idea. Though the remainder is a bit over the top.

Again many if not most (all?) parks are "money pits". Your words ... not mine. But please remember, the competitive swimming aspect of this project is but one little piece. There will be so much more. The competitive swimming will help with some income. Not only to the pool itself but to the taxpayers through visitors to our city, etc.

Panacea! IT WASNT BURIED! "not everyone blogs" .... "there is no constitutional requirement..." You cannot have it both ways!

You said "we" snuck it in. Just how? Tell me what "we" did? If TV, newsprint, websites, blogs, etc is not enough what is?!

You didnt answer my very simple question? What would you have "us" do differantly?

If you read the N&R everyday how did you not know the pool was in the P&R bond? It was covered and was certainly in the endorsements? Your typing out of both sides here.....

@Rbennet: I had to laugh at the "sore winners" line.

However, I should point out that Molly's post on "government involvement" is mostly historically correct. Alexander Hamilton (whom she was discussing) did believe in government support of public projects. The Federalists weren't quite the fiscal conservatives the Republicans are. If they had been, the City of Washington would never have been built (Started under Washington, finished under Adams, a Federalist). Or it would have been built by Halliburton and cost four times as much as it really did, with Cheny getting his cut.

Hamilton believed government debt was a good thing that kept the economic engine running. He never wanted to see that debt paid off. He probably spun like a top in his grave when Andrew Jackson killed the Bank of the United States and eliminated our debt for the only time in our history.

Where Molly doesn't get it quite right is when she says, "Civilizations have allowed their governments . . ." Public works projects, historically, have been the result of private individuals, not governments. Roman politicians built the Forum, the Coliseum, theatres, the aquaducts, and similar projects to benefit themselves politically with the masses, or to benefit state purposes such as roads to allow the army to travel quickly. Said programs were built with the politician's money to garner votes.

Subsequent building projects through to modern times have been similar. They were built for state purposes like security, to house the ruling class, for legal purposes, or some other purpose. Or they were built as financial ventures. Public transportation with trolleys and electric trains were built by private companies who expected to make a profit. The first LA subway was a privately owned concern that was having financial trouble and bought out by its competitors: rubber manufacturers who wanted to make tires for cars. Thus, the LA Freeway was born.

The idea of public works projects designed solely for the benefit of the citizenry at large, financed by government as a "service" to the population came with the New Deal as a way to put people back to work. It did that, but now the expectation is that if people want something, the government will pay for it.

The first libraries were started by Andrew Carnegie as a philanthropic cause--a private citizen giving to the public who supported the business interests that made him rich.

Now libraries are funded by government, and chronically short of cash.

As to Molly's comments on the numbers: I have a hard time swallowing the idea that a mere 3000 people a day for meets will justify the expense of $12 million dollars.

The owners of the Baltimore Orioles and the Washington Redskins each convinced the State of Maryland to fork over big bucks to pay for the construction of new sports stadiums for their teams. They promised the money would come back in the form of higher tax revenues from people coming to see games from out of town, and the trickle down through local businesses. It never happened. Maryland is still in the hole from building both those stadiums. Games at these stadiums cost an arm and a leg, and the owners keep almost all of it. So I'm unconvinced that this pool will help the local economy.

The public health angle Molly mentions comes from physical fitness programs using the water. You can get those at the Y, very cheaply too. Or you can exercise in other ways. I agree that there is a public health benefit to be had. But the cost does not justify the return. There many other public health programs that could reach far more people than a pool, when there are already plenty of pools in Guilford County.

Mick, what I would have you do is go to P&R and say, "the pool is too expensive, and too many people are unhappy with how it got voted in. Let's drop it and let the voters vote on it again in a few years."

Should people have known the pool was in the P&R bond? Yes. I've already said so, but your own selective reading caused you to miss it.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter why people didn't know. Too many people didn't know, and would have voted no had they understood. That's why people got upset.

I voted for the P&R bond not realizing it was in there. I missed it completely in spite of all my reading on local issues and events. So I can understand why other people also missed it, and why they feel tricked when they thought the pool bond was a dead issue this year.

Passions are running too hot at this point. This will be my last post on this thread.

I know I am responding to a comment quite a ways back up this thread but there is something
I feel I must comment on:
to Molly the dog:
"regarding the two smaller indoor pools, ones owned by the city and the other by Guilford County Schools. They have not been maintained, but neither have the schools.
There is a problem with operating budgets not
covering the annual maintenance of the facilities" this is your quote.

What makes anybody think that the operating budget for a new pool is going to be any better at keeping the facility up to standard. If the city
and county allow what they already have to go into severe disrepair they will allow a new pool to end up in the same shape.

Dan: thanks for standing up for me back up the thread there.

Selective answering abounds as well.

Panacea

You forgot to mention that Roman citizens were not taxed, but the empire gained wealth by the proceeds of conquered lands and people, who many ended up as slaves to the citizens of the Empire. Easy way to build projects! We tried this method 200 years ago and it did not work out to well. The Romans arrangement was a great deal different than the benefactors such as Carnigie and others. While I have had thoughts of plundering Raleigh and Charlotte and pulling on of their many pool facilities over to Greensboro, I have not figure out who is going to help (guns may be needed) nor have I figured out this engineer feat, but sure wish we could adopt their favorable attitudes towards recreational projects. Perhaps Greensboro may find the missing piece to economic growth and prosperity.

I appreciate the historical references. Where you got it wrong was with Jackson. He did take action with the Second National Bank and shunned national debt, but he was the first president to “represent the people” according to him. He truly believed he was a representative of the people, those that voted for him and those who did not. The citizens of Greensboro have voted, Jackson would be very accepting of their vote and desires.

Wasnt Jackson impeached?

NoName, I really wish I had a good answer for that issue. But I do not. Your fears there are certainly grounded in reality.

This is a first, usually only letters regarding abortion, Obama, Bush, Palin, homosexuality and race garner 45 responses on this blog. But a swimming pool in Greensboro, NC? And now it morphs back the Roman Empire, I believe they liked pools as well so what the hell.

Argue back and forth but, as I often advise my wife, what's done is done and cannot be changed. The pool bond passed and eventually there will be a pool. Congrats to you Mick and I hope your daughter prospers in her swimming career wherever she swims. I used the symphony as an example, however my son enjoys playing basketball and is pretty good for a 7 year old. Perhaps some of us "basketball dads" can get a taxpayer funded basketball arena added to a P&R bond someday:)

Thanks for the more civil discourse Mick.

Perhaps but here is what I see as a major diff....

All but a handful of "magnet type" high schools have basketball courts as well as football stadiums, baseball, soccer fields, track facilities, some have tennis. Some of the facilities are new or recent. So do many many rec centers have courts. Many of these facilities are capable of handling tournaments, crowds, etc. The little four was just held at CVM complex. Northern had a big tourny at the HS.

Two public high schools have pools. Both older and very small neither is capable of hosting a swim meet of any size. There are a few rec centers with courts too. No matter how you slice it... swimmers, both rec and comp, have far fewer facilities and opportunities.

In response to above

Most of us tried of shaking this issue, but facts and events should be brought forward. First, many P&R projects of been completed over recent years addressing citizens interest in recreation. The Sport Plex out on N 29 was one the larger recreational complexes completed that offers basketball, indoor soccer and other indoor recreational activities. Carol Allen baseball/softball complex was funded through a P&R bond years back. It was sizeable and also bundled with other projects. I am sure I voted for it, but do not recall reading about on the ballot or in the N&R, nor do I recall Mr. Johnson evoking his senseless wrath on this project, Barber Park or the Sports Plex, and other sizeable projects.

Allen Johnson presented multiple editorials on the bond and pool. His claim of deception is misleading, false and deplorable. It has to do with integrity of those who brought this bond to acceptance. There have been no facts or events cited that support Allen Johnson's claim, nor have any of the other letters to editor presented facts or events that support any deception. They believe Mr. Johnson is correct because of his position with the paper, or for lack of thoroughness. His claim is baseless, period! Selling papers is not synonymous with promoting community good. Controversy promotes paper sales and those that write the bs.

The Parks and Recreation Dept. had included this project in the 20 year project plan created in 1998. This P&R department drove confidence in the project and bond because of their reputation of delivering facilities and services to the citizens of the community, hence a favorable vote occurred. This was very different from prior proposals for the pool project.

The process started many years back, and the bond issue and projects were brought up in June of 2008, long before the financial melt down. A public hearing occurred sometime in late July and a vote on the bond projects by the city council occurred in early August. The bond projects are on hold, per subsequent city council vote, until an improved economy and favorable bond issuance environment occurs.

In the meantime, next time you are in Charlotte drop by the MCAC (pool center downtown, and one of several) and witness the participation, then asked the citizens of Charlotte whether this was a worthy project.

Thanks for reading this and I hope that it clarifies the issues. I am out of here on this thread. Thanks