8/7/2023 version of the FOTP's web page

Post Reply
Fun CH
Posts: 1440
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
Contact:

Re: 8/7/2023 version of the FOTP's web page

Post by Fun CH »

PAL wrote: Tue Oct 03, 2023 6:49 pm One would think those that you mentioned would get it about the regressive taxes and the affects on low income people, Chris. They see all the other projects and they think there is alot of money in the Valley. And there are some pockets. But money through taxation on the property owners unbelievable.
That is the creepy video that I have been seeing. At first they said "lies" and changed it to "False", which is false.
They missed the mark on this proposal and the pulse of the Valley.
well to me it certainly is a conundrum. Joe, Julie, and the two Don's are all good people, heck, so are the FOP board members, we just disagree on how to fund a pool and the scope of that project. How did it get so out of hand that apparently Pro pool supporters are stealing signs?

How did the Methow ethic of "giving" what you can to your community turn into a Metropolitan Park District proposal that imposes regressive taxes on those who can't afford it and is the very definition of "taking"?

They must really want to swim year round in our cold northern climate. Most of us can't afford that option.

What's next, indoor year round skiing?

Party on FOP and peace out.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
PAL
Posts: 1936
Joined: Tue May 25, 2021 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: 8/7/2023 version of the FOTP's web page

Post by PAL »

One would think those that you mentioned would get it about the regressive taxes and the affects on low income people, Chris. They see all the other projects and they think there is alot of money in the Valley. And there are some pockets. But money through taxation on the property owners unbelievable.
That is the creepy video that I have been seeing. At first they said "lies" and changed it to "False", which is false.
They missed the mark on this proposal and the pulse of the Valley.
Pearl Cherrington
Fun CH
Posts: 1440
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
Contact:

Re: 8/7/2023 version of the FOTP's web page

Post by Fun CH »

pasayten wrote: Tue Oct 03, 2023 12:39 pm What is the facebook link to the new post? I am not seeing anything.
There doesn't appear to be a page link. My facebook is blocked so I just uninstalled it as I was only using it to comment on the FOP site. I'm guessing all my comments are removed. There was another lady calling BS on that video that they posted.

https://m.facebook.com/Twispfriendsofthepool

Basically its a video that shows the flyer that you put together and that text I posted above. Very dark Orwellian type video that doesn't mention a Metropolitan Park District and basically says we're lying about the 21 million dollar pool plan. The truth is posted here for all to see with the FOP original narrative and the new narrative.

They obviously didn't want people to read the truth here and cancelled me out when I provided that link to this thread.

Heaven Help Us if they get a hold of our tax dollars. From the Behavior I've been observing as a whole (pro pool people) these people are ruthless.

Edit: I didn't see your post above Ray. Looks like you found that New FB page.
Last edited by Fun CH on Tue Oct 03, 2023 8:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
User avatar
pasayten
Posts: 2978
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: 8/7/2023 version of the FOTP's web page

Post by pasayten »

Friends of the Pool - Twisp

There are many misunderstandings and misconceptions in our community right now regarding the pool and proposition 1. We understand that, and hope this video,and others, can help clarify things for you. Thank you for watching.
One common misconception is that voting yes for proposition 1 is a vote for a $20 million dollar, fancy facility.
This is FALSE.
Voting for proposition 1 does two things. It creates leadership and funding for public swimming in the Methow Valley.
Vote YES on prop 1.
What? Proposition 1 is a vote for a Metropolitan Park District that could build a $5, 10, 20, 50 million dollar facility if it wanted. Even throw in a gym and climbing wall...

Their ad "Vote for a pool, Vote yes on Proposition 1" is the false statement. There are many other funding methods to build a pool without a permanent Metropolitan Park District. You can vote no and we can still build a pool. One with voter input.


A healthy Methow Valley with the MAC
Friends of the Pool - Twisp

Did you know that swimming is one of the best exercises for your body and mind? By supporting Proposition 1 and the MAC, we're not only creating a new year-around pool for our community, but we're also supporting a healthier and happier Methow Valley! Let's make a splash and vote YES on Proposition 1 this fall!
Hmmm... Sounds like a $20 million dollar facility to me...
pasayten
Ray Peterson
Fun CH
Posts: 1440
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
Contact:

Re: 8/7/2023 version of the FOTP's web page

Post by Fun CH »

PAL wrote: Tue Oct 03, 2023 3:37 pm Those that support it may not even look at their Facebook page. They must not know about using children in ads. I didn't know.
I told someone signs were being stolen and they assumed it was the Prop 1 signs for, that were being stolen. I let them know otherwise.
Yes it is likely they don't know about the ethical implications of using children under the age of 14 as political props in the FOP political advertising. As I mentioned earlier I doubt the FOP even considered it . But didn't that always seem kind of fishy to you? That "its for the children" political messaging and parading out pictures of children having fun at the pool that is really about forming a Metropolitan Tax District? It's fairly obvious that the FOP wants to avoid the MPD message.

But surly those folks that I mentioned understand what regressive taxes are and the effect regressive taxes have on low-income people.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
PAL
Posts: 1936
Joined: Tue May 25, 2021 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: 8/7/2023 version of the FOTP's web page

Post by PAL »

Those that support it may not even look at their Facebook page. They must not know about using children in ads. I didn't know.
I told someone signs were being stolen and they assumed it was the Prop 1 signs for, that were being stolen. I let them know otherwise.
Just went to their FB page. Am still seeing the video that now says our flyers are false. And there are kids in one photo that says to vote for Prop 1.
But I don't comment as I am not using my account. Well, I don't have an account.
But can't view all the comments. Only some.
Pearl Cherrington
Fun CH
Posts: 1440
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
Contact:

Re: 8/7/2023 version of the FOTP's web page

Post by Fun CH »

pasayten wrote: Tue Oct 03, 2023 12:39 pm What is the facebook link to the new post? I am not seeing anything.
their facebook page isn't available to me any longer. It blips on for a fraction of a second then goes to a screen that says page not available. Cleared cookies and browser but same thing.

Does that mean my IP address is banned? If so I'd say they are having a hard time with truth, like their use of racial slurs and violating young children's rights by using them as props in their political advertising.

I have a hard time believing Don over at KVLR or Don at MVN or Joe and Julie at Winthrop Cycle supports this lack of ethical behavior on the part of the FOP. Is ad money or money from selling chain grease really that important to them?

Or is there some other motivating factor that allows them to ignore traditional rural values of "giving" what you can to your community?

Why would anyone support "taking" from other's who have less, especially to fund a 21 million dollar pleasure Palace that runs a $500,000 budget deficit every year, forever that property owners have to pay?

I'd loose my faith in humanity if not for the many people that I've met and are relatively new to this valley that come here with a good ethical Foundation and respect for the local culture. They want what we want. To live in peace and enjoy Nature's Bounty.

They are voting no on pool prop 1.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
User avatar
pasayten
Posts: 2978
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: 8/7/2023 version of the FOTP's web page

Post by pasayten »

What is the facebook link to the new post? I am not seeing anything.
pasayten
Ray Peterson
Fun CH
Posts: 1440
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
Contact:

Re: 8/7/2023 version of the FOTP's web page

Post by Fun CH »

New FOP face book post. Quote

"There are many misunderstandings and misconceptions in our community right now regarding the pool and proposition 1. We understand that, and hope this video,and others, can help clarify things for you. Thank you for watching.

One common misconception is that voting yes for proposition 1 is a vote for a $20 million dollar, fancy facility.

This is FALSE.

Voting for proposition 1 does two things. It creates leadership and funding for public swimming in the Methow Valley.

Vote YES on prop 1." End quote

Note that what were we are really voting on, ie., yes or no on establishment of a Metropolitan Park District is not mentioned in their text.

And my reply on capture.
Vote no on pool prop 1
Vote no on pool prop 1
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
PAL
Posts: 1936
Joined: Tue May 25, 2021 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: 8/7/2023 version of the FOTP's web page

Post by PAL »

Ray, thanks for keeping this and posting. This is getting maddening, frustrating and is making angry. I wasn't before, but now I am a wet hen!
Pearl Cherrington
User avatar
pasayten
Posts: 2978
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: 8/7/2023 version of the FOTP's web page

Post by pasayten »

See how their message has CHANGED on their current versions of their webpage? Like nailing jello to a wall... :D
What is the MAC?
The MAC stands for the Methow Aquatic Center and it’s the name we’ve been using to refer to the future pool. Based on community and expert input gathered from 2019-2022, an indoor, year-round facility with two pools of different temperatures, was selected for the current working plan. There is no guarantee the commissioners will move ahead with this option. With more public input, the Methow Aquatics District leaders will determine the final design and size of the pool to best serve our growing community. This decision will be subject to budget considerations, citizen input, and private fundraising to build the pool.

The MAC could be a phased project, starting with an outdoor pool, eventually covering it, or adding a gym or other amenities.
pasayten
Ray Peterson
Fun CH
Posts: 1440
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Current version of the FOTP's web page

Post by Fun CH »

PAL wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2023 2:32 pm Somewhere in the Feasibility study it also states they could expand the district beyond the school district. There were borders delineating the expansion, which still only included the Methow Valley.
In my letter to the editory I mentioned that. So people that might be thinking they dodged the bullet, may not if that area was expanded. When I have time I will try to find it.
RCW 35.61.280
"If the majority of the votes* cast upon that question at the election shall favor annexation, the territory shall immediately become annexed to the park district, and shall thenceforth be a part of the park district, the same as though originally included in the district. "

* only voters in the proposed territory to be annexed vote to be included or not in the MPD.

So if an area such as Pateros with a low population density votes to join the Methow MPD, we would help pay for any recreational improvements they desire there, like a Yacht Club.


It just keeps getting better. (sarcasm)
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
PAL
Posts: 1936
Joined: Tue May 25, 2021 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Current version of the FOTP's web page

Post by PAL »

Somewhere in the Feasibility study it also states they could expand the district beyond the school district. There were borders delineating the expansion, which still only included the Methow Valley.
In my letter to the editory I mentioned that. So people that might be thinking they dodged the bullet, may not if that area was expanded. When I have time I will try to find it.
Pearl Cherrington
Fun CH
Posts: 1440
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Current version of the FOTP's web page

Post by Fun CH »

Below is quote from the FOP web page. They argue that Twisp residents shouldn't have to foot the tax Bill to operate their city pool because others outside the city use the pool so any new mega spa should be paid by those who use it.

However if you live outside our school district and use the mega spa, you don't have to pay a pool tax.

I live inside the school district and don't plan on using the new mega spa so why do I have to pay $800 a year for others to use the mega spa, especially tourists who will only pay the $4.00 to $6.00 entry fee?

By their logic, shouldn't the whole County or even the State pay taxes for their dream mega spa?

One question for supporters. Would you agree to only tax people who are supporting the mega spa? You will pay a bit more in taxes but you're OK with that right?

Why put the burden on those who don't use the mega spa or can't afford the ever increasing property taxes?



Quote from FOP
"For the past 50 years, the Town of Twisp has had the sole responsibility of operating and maintaining the Wagner Pool. While they have relied heavily on charitable giving, they’ve also had to rely on their own tax revenue from the General Fund to cover the costs, putting the burden on tax payers of Twisp alone. But the pool is used valley-wide so it makes sense that all the valley residents chip in to provide a regional public benefit".
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
Fun CH
Posts: 1440
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Current version of the FOTP's web page

Post by Fun CH »

pasayten wrote: Tue Aug 08, 2023 2:50 pm Everything is vague with the FOTP's plan except they want a metropolitan park district up front so they can have a permanent revenue stream BLANK CHECK on the back of all the property owners in the Valley. Good deal for them... Bad deal for the property owners (and renters)...
I think misleading is a better word. The last time this issue came up for a vote, the voters had a choice of candidates that were elected at the same time as the ballot measure. Those Commissioners would only of course hold office if the ballot proposition passed, which it didn't with 78% to 22% no vote.

Giving the voters a choice to elect Metropolitan Park District board members is standard practice from all the other Washington State Metropolitan District ballot propositions that I've examined.

This time, the voters don't have a choice and the FOP board members have complete control over who the candidates will be.

If you read Anne's McCreary's article before you signed the FOP ballot measure petition, you would have been led to believe that the MPD Ford would be comprised of;

one member of Twisp Town Council

one member of Winthrop Town Council

One member being current County Commissioner Andy Hoover

And the Twisp and Winthrop town councils would select the two other board members.

That just ain't so. The ballot proposition is not worded that way.

Here's another quote from that article.

"Having board members who are elected officials, or appointed by local governments, ensures the district board will be accountable to voters, Porter said."

If you read the governing structure as it appears on the proposition ballot petition, it doesn't say anything about board members being existing "elected officials". Porter does qualify that statement by saying or "appointed by local governments". What he doesn't say is how candidates will be chosen to present to those local governments for appointment.

Misleading information or they really don't have a clue?

In either case, MPD board members will not be elected by the voters and never will be.
SOulman wrote: Tue Aug 08, 2023 3:17 pm What remains unclear and controversial is how two "at large" appointments are made.
that is not how the ballot proposition petition is worded.

All five members can be "at Large" appointments by the two town councils from a FOP selected group of candidates. Do you really think the FOP wants to give up any kind of control?

Here's a clue; they censor anyone who disagrees with them from their Facebook page. They banned Ray even though he was offering a civil discussion.

They use and then change racist language on their Facebook page without offering a public apology.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
SOulman
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2023 2:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Current version of the FOTP's web page

Post by SOulman »

It should be obvious, but Comm. Hover confirmed in a recent conversation that the interlocal agreement would not be considered until and if Proposition 1 passes. Smart, no sense wasting time and resources.

On the other hand . . . .

Paper will lie still and let you write on it what you want. It is impossible to understand what the governing body structure will be. Maybe there will be clarity since the official ballot title has been submitted to the county auditor.

While I prefer an elected commission, I could accept one that comprises an elected official from the Okanogan County, Twisp and Winthrop as has been reported. What remains unclear and controversial is how two "at large" appointments are made.

Ceding authority to the town councils raises the possibility that 4/5 of commissioners represent town interests. As has been clearly pointed out by others, the majority population and property value of a proposed district lies outside town boundaries.
User avatar
pasayten
Posts: 2978
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Current version of the FOTP's web page

Post by pasayten »

Everything is vague with the FOTP's plan except they want a metropolitan park district up front so they can have a permanent revenue stream BLANK CHECK on the back of all the property owners in the Valley. Good deal for them... Bad deal for the property owners (and renters)...
pasayten
Ray Peterson
Fun CH
Posts: 1440
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Current version of the FOTP's web page

Post by Fun CH »

And here is the governing structure as described by the MethowValley news article by Anne McCreary. This is another completely different governing structure from the two quoted in my previous post. Anne's article describes the governing structure to include 3 already elected officials. But that's not what the ballot measure says in paragraph #1 above.

What this means that within the MPD board, all five board members can draw a salary and Civil Service pension that they determine and all five members can be existing FOP board members.

"Additionally, the Methow Aquatics District would be governed by a five-member board of commissioners whose members would be appointed, rather than elected at the time of the district’s creation, as in the 2014 proposal.

The board would include one Twisp Town Council member, one Winthrop Town Council member, and the Okanogan County commissioner representing the Methow Valley. Two other at-large members who live within the Methow Valley School District boundaries would be appointed by the Twisp and Winthrop town councils."

https://methowvalleynews.com/2023/06/22 ... -district/
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
Fun CH
Posts: 1440
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Current version of the FOTP's web page

Post by Fun CH »

Notice these two paragraphs contained within that FOP material that you cited Ray. Paragraph #1 describes the governing structure how it appears on the petition.

There are no interlocal agreements currently in place for voters to scrutinize.The interlocal agreement could state that all five members of the Metropolitan Park District board must be approved and elected from a pool of candidates selected by the FOP board.

That is actually quite a bit different governing structure than the structure that is described in Paragraph #2, also quoted below.

Paragraph #1 as it appears on the petition and cited on the FOP web page.

"The District would be governed by a five member board appointed by the Okanogan County Commission and the Twisp and Winthrop Town Councils as provided by interlocal agreement approved by the three jurisdictions."

Paragraph #2 as it appears on the FOP webpage.

"The Methow Aquatics District, once formed via voter approval, will be governed by a five member board of commissioners comprised of 3 elected officials, representing the jurisdictions within the district and 2 members at-large appointed by the Towns of Winthrop and Twisp."

So which governing structure will it be #1 or#2? It will be paragraph #1, because that is what the voters signed on the petition and how it will appear on the ballot. That governing structure insures complete control by the current FOP board,and who ever they decide will sit on the board in the future.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
User avatar
pasayten
Posts: 2978
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:03 pm
Contact:

8/7/2023 version of the FOTP's web page

Post by pasayten »

This is the current version of the FOTP's web page 8/7/2023...
Always good to take snapshots as things may change over time...



What’s the MAC?

The Methow Aquatics Center (MAC) is a multi-purpose aquatics facility that can be used ALL year by EVERYONE in the Methow Valley. It will replace the Wagner Pool in Twisp at a new location. The center will support youth swim lessons, competitive swimming for all ages, leisure swim, rehabilitation, and water related safety programs in an indoor facility safe from wildfire smoke and harsh weather.
fop-mac-render.jpg
The above drawing depicts conceptual square footage for planning purposes only (by Johnston Architects)

A six-lane pool - for laps, exercise, racing, and recreation

A warmer recreational pool for swim lessons, exercise classes, and fun

A spa hot tub for therapy and relaxation

An outdoor jetted splash pad for kids

Changing facilities for individuals and families

A multi-purpose room for parties, training, and programs

Admin space and a front desk

Outdoor open space

Parking

The community has spoken and the MAC is our future.

Why a Year Round Pool?

Since 2019 Friends of the Pool has engaged the community in numerous ways to gain insight and feedback on the best way to secure a future of swimming for the valley. To date, we’ve :

conducted small stakeholder discussion groups and online surveys,

hosted community open houses, zoom meetings, and information booths

worked with elected officials and current pool management to learn

engaged on social media, print, and online formats to inform and seek participation

time and time again the overwhelming voice has been to build year round swimming.

From all of this outreach, the community has voiced that most desirable replacement plan for the Wagner Pool would be a year round facility.

The MAC plan include two pools of different designs and temperatures for a variety of uses to provide access for different users at the same time. This is to support a diverse user group ranging in age from young and old and varying mobilities. A six-lane pool will be used for lap swimming, swim competitions, and other higher exertion activities where cooler water is best. Alongside this will be a warmer recreational pool suited to children’s lessons, exercise for adults, and rehabilitation.

Vote for the MAC!
Petitions have been submitted to the Okanogan County Auditor’s Office for the formation of the Methow Aquatics District and shall be listed as Proposition 1. Proposition 1 reads as follows:

A petition of the voters has been submitted concerning formation of a metropolitan park district. If approved, this proposition would create a district under chapter 35.61 RCW, to be known as the Methow Aquatics District, to provide ongoing funding to develop, construct, operate, and maintain the Methow Aquatics Center and related existing and future facilities. The District would have the powers provided under chapter 35.61 RCW, excluding eminent domain, but including, among others, to levy regular property taxes up to 75 cents per $1,000 assessed value, and its boundaries would be coterminous with the boundaries of Methow Valley School District 350. The District would be governed by a five member board appointed by the Okanogan County Commission and the Twisp and Winthrop Town Councils as provided by interlocal agreement approved by the three jurisdictions.

What is the Methow Aquatics District and why do we need it?
The Methow Aquatics District (MAD) is a type of special purpose district, in this case, a Metropolitan Park District (MPD), available to communities to form in Washington State to fund special public benefits. Learn more here about MPDs.

Building a new public pool is a costly and complex undertaking for a rural area. For the past 50 years, the Town of Twisp has had the sole responsibility of operating and maintaining the Wagner Pool. While they have relied heavily on charitable giving, they’ve also had to rely on their own tax revenue from the General Fund to cover the costs, putting the burden on tax payers of Twisp alone. But the pool is used valley-wide so it makes sense that all the valley residents chip in to provide a regional public benefit.

The MPD provides a governing structure for local jurisdictions to partner together for a shared value. The Methow Aquatics District, once formed via voter approval, will be governed by a five member board of commissioners comprised of 3 elected officials, representing the jurisdictions within the district and 2 members at-large appointed by the Towns of Winthrop and Twisp.

The MPD structure was chosen for a variety of reasons:

Sustainable revenue. In order to raise the capital funds needed to build a new pool of any size, grants from state, federal, or private foundations and donations from private donors will be part of the equation. We need to assure donors and granters that we can and will sustain what they help us build. We’ve spoken to our state, federal, and local representatives, donors, and recreation advisors - they all concur a district is necessary to support the project in the long term. The MPD does this because it’s a permanent levy. That doesn’t mean the levy rate is set in stone, but it does mean we will be assured that any capital investment will be supported in perpetuity through a levy. It would be irresponsible to spend millions of dollars on a public facility, only to have the levy fail on future ballots, rendering it inoperable.

Financing. Because the levy is a permanent levy, the district will be able to finance a portion of the capital expense, if needed. About 25% of proposed MAC capital expense (roughly $5milllion) could be paid via debt financing. Similarly, if needed, the Commission could return to the voters for an excess levy to issue bonds. We hope to avoid this option and fundraise the remaining capital privately.

Governance. The MPD has strengths for successful governance. The first 5 years of the Aquatic District will be critical. With this in mind, this approach harnesses the skills and knowledge of existing elected officials to lead our community towards the vision of year round swimming. We chose an interlocal agreement because it requires partnership building by negotiating and communicating with every legislative authority in MVSD 350. In many ways it would have been easier to not take this route, but we value the ongoing communication with these elected officials and value their knowledge and leadership. Using our elected officials in the governance structure makes them accountable to the public as well. Using appointed members at large provides the opportunity to appoint well qualified and committed board members who value the purpose of the district.

How much will this affect my property tax?

The Commissioners will set the levy annually to an amount adequate to ensure the facility can operate. That means the levy rate will fluctuate based on the annual budget, but at most, it will be not exceed the statutory rate of $0.75/1000 of assessed property value. To operate a facility like the current MAC, as proposed, a levy rate of $0.40/1000 would be adequate. However, the board may decide they need to utilize some levy capacity to help build the facility (see above under Financing).

How will this impact low income, fixed income households?

This will be a general levy and subject to property tax exemptions for those individuals and households who qualify. Currently there are 189 individuals and households in the district who qualify for this exemption. We encourage anyone 61 and older or who have a disability to see if they qualify and apply for exemptions.

The current MAC operational analysis provides a very generous and affordable fee schedule: $4 for children and seniors and $6 for adults. If entrance fees are still a barrier to access, Friends of the Pool, like we always have, will work with our community partners the Kiwanis, the Cove, and RoomOne to ensure access for all.

What about our housing issues, will this impact affordable housing?

We are concerned about affordable housing too. Unfortunately, housing affordability is a market driven, societal issue that persists, regardless of a new local tax. This project benefits our low income families by providing a safe and affordable place to recreate year round - specifically because it relies on all of us from varying incomes and property values to chip in. In terms of housing, we have a very committed group of citizens looking at housing solutions and we applaud those efforts. We’ve considered adding dormitories, or manager housing to the center - and those options still exist. Opportunities to collaborate and work together to face our collective challenges abound. It’s not a zero sum game, an all or nothing solution. It’s an everything solution and an everyone solution.

If voters opt to not fund the Aquatics Center, our housing challenges will not be solved. If we do build a publicly supported Aquatics Center, our low and medium income families will have an affordable alternative to otherwise costly recreational activities, allowing any flexible income to be expended on other needs, including housing.

Why the MAC!
A gathering hub for all people, all ages, all year

Pools provide a safe space for kids to gain independence

It will serve as an indoor airshed and climate resilient facility

Vibrant communities have pools

A safe and healthy place for our aging population

The Wagner Pool is on life support and needs replacement now!

Support the MAC
How do we get there?
Building the MAC is a complex project and it will take a variety of sources of funding to make it a realty.

The Methow Aquatic District is necessary for an operating levy to fund the ongoing operations and maintenance. Depending on the level of funding from the levy, some of the revenue may be used to pay for a construction bond.

Grants. We are seeking grants from a variety of sources.

Donations - Capital Campaign. We hope to raise a large portion of the capital for this project from private donors.

How do I get involved?
The Task Force meets every Monday 5:30 in Twisp. To join the Task Force for the Methow Aquatics District, please contact methowvalleyrecdistrict@gmail.com.
pasayten
Ray Peterson
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest