Last Gasp for Indoor Aquatic Center

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

Re: Last Gasp for Indoor Aquatic Center

Post by Fun CH »

mister_coffee wrote: Mon Nov 06, 2023 2:44 pm Not all of the reasons either for or in opposition to the aquatics district proposal impressed me. Some of them (on both sides) annoyed and offended my common sense.
different sensibilities appeal to different people. Best to cover all of issues in a political debate, that's just common sense.

The FOP did their best to avoid what a Metropolitan Park District entails. They even avoided those words as much as possible and used phrases such as the Methow Aquatics Center, recreation district, and whatever the acronym MAD stands for.

In the ballot statement on what prop 1 is, the attorney who wrote it did not even use caps in the words "metropolitan park district"( just like that) .

The FOP dismissed the tax hit on low income seniors and I never saw anything from them about the tax hit on non senior low income families. They even tried to sell their plan as a benefit and being affordable recreation for low income families.

It was a smoke screen right from the start.
SOulman wrote: Mon Nov 06, 2023 2:18 pm It has been unnecessarily divisive for the community.
The community is already divided as you know from reading Dr. Sherman's book.

This issue just highlights that division. Many of us here have been fighting against the entitlement that has recently moved here for awhile now. Fortunately at the moment it's only a relatively few who are pushing a self gain agenda at the expense of others.

Once I found out who was behind this, along with Don setting the debate tone by calling us "paranoid", I took the gloves off.

Take comfort in the fact that the opposition to prop 1 was a bipartisan effort.

SOulman wrote: Mon Nov 06, 2023 2:18 pm What is truly remarkable that one of the proponents' closing arguments is that the community needs a year-round, indoor aquatic center.
I agree. There was never any doubt that their plan was for the $20+million Mega MAC. I don't think their changed political narrative and then saying that opponents were spreading false information helped them at all.

But if prop 1 fails they will be back with a refined message.

Don't throw away the signs as they may be needed again.
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: 2420
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Last Gasp for Indoor Aquatic Center

Post by pasayten »

Don’t think many folks look at their Facebook page anyway…. They probably are gnashing their teeth that we had two different letters to the editor this week depicting alternate pool plans that would work in lieu of the MPD and they don’t have time to spin and refute it before voting is closed
pasayten
Ray Peterson
SOulman
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2023 2:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Last Gasp for Indoor Aquatic Center

Post by SOulman »

David -

I agree with this analysis. I agree with most of your observations.

A publicly-financed indoor aquatic center is simply not appropriate for a sparsely-populated, off-the-beaten-path rural community. It is a solution in search of a problem and not a community priority.

Our community faces serious and existential issues. Year-round swimming is not one of them.

I hope that we never have to deal with the issue again. Good riddance.

- Steve Oulman
User avatar
mister_coffee
Posts: 1334
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
Location: Winthrop, WA
Contact:

Re: Last Gasp for Indoor Aquatic Center

Post by mister_coffee »

I agree with the assertion that a year-round indoor pool is an excellent facility for teaching people how to swim and develop basic water safety skills.

I also think that the proposal on the ballot was a very poor one and not appropriate to support. For a lot of reasons.

Not all of the reasons either for or in opposition to the aquatics district proposal impressed me. Some of them (on both sides) annoyed and offended my common sense.
:arrow: David Bonn :idea:
PAL
Posts: 1270
Joined: Tue May 25, 2021 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Last Gasp for Indoor Aquatic Center

Post by PAL »

On their latest Facebook post, the next one down, they are saying the Mega complex is false. Guess an indoor year round doesn't have to be mega, but it would still cost mega dollars.
First one is what you noted Steve, year round.
But it most probably will not pass.
Pearl Cherrington
SOulman
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2023 2:51 pm
Contact:

Last Gasp for Indoor Aquatic Center

Post by SOulman »

It is a relief that this campaign is over. It has been unnecessarily divisive for the community.

What is truly remarkable that one of the proponents' closing arguments is that the community needs a year-round, indoor aquatic center.

I am simply beyond words . . . .

Steve Oulman

______________________

Facebook
November 6

YES ON PROP 1!

WHY? Because our kids deserve a safe place where they can learn how to swim - for more than 2 months a year.
Tomorrow is your last day to turn in your ballots. Every vote counts!
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests