How to fund a pool like an adult

[Fun CH]

...
The root of the problem is that an indoor aquatic center is simply not appropriate or fiscally responsible for a small rural community. That's why the current discussion is so difficult.

I agree if the numbers don't work, the proposal doesn't work.

So the questions really are: what is a realistic and achievable proposal? What kind of facility can be built or rebuilt with realistic and achievable funding? And certainly accomplishing something constructive is better than a pie-in-the-sky proposal that just annoys a lot of people. Or just annoying and alienating a lot of people for the fun of it.

David, who is "annoying and alienating a lot of people for the fun of it."?

I know everytime I bring up the connection between the FOP and commercial guiding control of the North Cascades its definitely not fun to relive the intimidation and harassment I received for trying to hold North Cascade Heli accountable for their unlawful actions. But I suppose that's the point anytime harassment and intimidation are used, ie to try to shut people up.


This certainly is a divisive issue. The FOP dangled a bright shinny object in front of people and a lot of people, some don't even own property here, thought this issue was about keeping swimming happening in Twisp.

I think people believe what they hope will happen like thinking the Mega spa will actually be built in Twisp when Winthrop or Mazama are the more likely candidates.

From past experience with dealing the driving force behind this, don't under estimate the effects that the misinformation, ambiguity and misdirection the FOP is putting out will have on voters. From the start, people thought this issue was about a new indoor pool complex when its really about establishing a permanent Metropolitan Park District that includes 5 highly paid MPD board commissioners and no further voter control unless they want to raise the tax levy rate above .75 per thousand dollars of assessed value.

Imagine each fixed income senior household having to pay an additional $25,000 to $60,000 over their last 25 years or so years of life to fund multiple luxury facilities that they won't ever use.


I googled Assisted living in Wenatchee

"Residents pay an average of $5,750 per month, according to the 2021 Genworth Cost of Care Survey.Feb 18, 2023"

[mister_coffee]

...
The root of the problem is that an indoor aquatic center is simply not appropriate or fiscally responsible for a small rural community. That's why the current discussion is so difficult.

I agree if the numbers don't work, the proposal doesn't work.

So the questions really are: what is a realistic and achievable proposal? What kind of facility can be built or rebuilt with realistic and achievable funding? And certainly accomplishing something constructive is better than a pie-in-the-sky proposal that just annoys a lot of people. Or just annoying and alienating a lot of people for the fun of it.

[Fun CH]

That would be on average a $50 per year tax hit. Since most of the folks we are concerned about would be well below that tax hit, I think the arguments against this unfairly falling on those least able to pay the costs are not particularly strong. That is because the average tax bill is likely quite a bit higher than the median tax bill. Also you should acknowledge that the very highest property tax bills are probably paid by corporations or wealthy part-time residents.

perhaps it doesn't seem like a strong argument to you because you don't know the facts. I just spoke with a low income senior who was a contractor who generously gave his time and effort to literally help build this community.

The tax implication of this Metropolitan Park District would cost him $1,000 per year. This is occurring because our assessed values keep going up as property demand continues to rise so that number will be higher in the future. On a home with property that I constructed for less than $150,000 because I pound nails, now has an assessed valued at $570,000, counting the $100,000 added assessed value increase this year alone.

Based on genetics he can expect to live another 25-30 years, so he's looking at paying at the very minimum $25,000-$30,000 over that period of time. That number will continue to rise as property taxes rise, and like me, our incomes are fixed.

Also like me, he knows how fast our parents were depleted of their savings as they aged and became ill.

Every penny counts. Not everyone around here who's been here for 30 or 40 years was able to accumulate the amount of wealth that you seem to have acquired living and working somewhere else.

So please don't assume you know how much money we local seniors have or need.

I have no opinion on the people involved in advocating for a pool, though I do know some of them personally and my impression of them does not match many of the remarks about their character that I am reading on this forum. This is a situation where people of good faith could have honest disagreements on what is a reasonable course of action. As for myself, I just like to swim and that isn't very fun to do outside in November or April.

you obviously do have an opinion on the character of the FOP. Just look at the attack tittle of this thread and you have mentioned something to the effect they're not acting like adults before.

They of course are acting exactly like adults, placing self interest gain over community needs. Again this isn't about a pool it's about the creation of a very powerful unelected non-voter accountable highly paid Commissioners of THEIR proposed Metropolitan Park District.

The FOP board will be those highly paid unelected Metropolitan Park District commissioners. Otherwise they would have allowed the voters to elect the MPD commissioners like, just about every other Metropolitan Park District that was established in high population areas.


Were you around here in 2012 when NCH, in an unlawful act cut down a federally listed species?

Were you harassed and borderline threatened by these people for speaking out?

I was, and I don't like to be politically intimidated my people who don't like the facts of their behavior. So yea, their character is relevant was fully on display recently when FOP board member BoThrasher harassed me in front of the Mazama Store. In the 20 years or so that the Butlers have lived here, those were the first words that she ever spoke to me.

If a man had approached me with anger on his face and said "do you have something to say to my face" I would be looking for a gun or a knife in his hand."

If you like to swim during the cold months around here you could always buy a vacation home Wenatchee.

Expecting low income people to pay for your pleasure I don't get it?

Walking around in other people's shoes seems relevant here.

[SOulman]

David -

I think your analysis is sound for an outdoor pool similar to what we have today or what Tonasket replaced in the past decade.

I am skeptical that there is much outside support for an expensive indoor facility as is proposed. A benefit/cost analysis isn't very strong in this community's favor.

There have been reports that organizations like the Y have taken a pass because there simply is not a population base to make an indoor facility work.

The pool feasibility study consultant told me that use numbers are weak and may be overly optimistic.

Getting $10 M in grants is highly unlikely from a single source. Cobbling together multiple grants from a variety of sources with different missions, criteria and timelines can be very challenging. Getting $5 M from the community in a capital campaign seems like a big ask as the pool proponents don't have a track record or credibility like the Conservancy or the school district. Remember how hard it was to get a new fire station built?

The root of the problem is that an indoor aquatic center is simply not appropriate or fiscally responsible for a small rural community. That's why the current discussion is so difficult.

- Steve Oulman

[mister_coffee]

I'd support a pool proposal with a $5MM bond issue and $100k per year for Operations and Maintenance. The rest of the funding would have to come from other sources.

That would be on average a $50 per year tax hit. Since most of the folks we are concerned about would be well below that tax hit, I think the arguments against this unfairly falling on those least able to pay the costs are not particularly strong. That is because the average tax bill is likely quite a bit higher than the median tax bill. Also you should acknowledge that the very highest property tax bills are probably paid by corporations or wealthy part-time residents.

I have no opinion on the people involved in advocating for a pool, though I do know some of them personally and my impression of them does not match many of the remarks about their character that I am reading on this forum. This is a situation where people of good faith could have honest disagreements on what is a reasonable course of action. As for myself, I just like to swim and that isn't very fun to do outside in November or April.

Also, a stationary exercise bike and swimming are about the same calorie burn. Source:

https://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist4.htm

Oh, and I went to Wenatchee yesterday afternoon and evening and swam in an indoor pool.

[Fun CH]

David, do you have a stationary bike? If not, it can really help during these shiity days. Exercise is great for mood.

Personally I don't want to establish another tax Authority in any form. Okanogan County already has a Recreation tax authority.

Lets not loose our spirt of communty and "can do" attitude by thinking a new non elected governmental body can replace that.

[mister_coffee]

I'd argue that some combination of revenue and private fundraising could cover O&M, or at least the majority of O&M.

What I'd like to see is that whatever tax authority for a pool is developed should only be able to issue bonds for 25 percent of the capital costs and tax for between 20 and 30 percent of annual operation and maintenance. I also think Ray's idea of paying for this with sales tax revenue rather than property taxes has merit and should be explored -- and also maybe an additional lodging tax, or maybe kill two birds** with one stone and tax vacation rentals.

One weak point of a dedicated district for a pool is that it is going to less cost-efficient hiring maintenance staff than if they were shared with a town's maintenance staff.

Arguably you'd need two full-time staff: an administrator and a janitor. You'd have a contract for the maintenance. Then a gaggle of part-time workers who would be lifeguards, clean unmentionable stuff out of the pool, and cashiers.

I note that the two full-time positions translates into about $200,000 per year assuming modest salaries and overhead. I have no idea what a maintenance and servicing contract for a facility like that would cost. Without more knowledge about how the pool would be used you can't really make decent estimates on how many part-time staff you'd need, although certain activities like open swim sessions would require much more staff (and be much less profitable than say renting the facility for physical therapy or swim team training).

I am very turned off by some of the advocates who argue that use of the pool should be free.

** The "other bird" you'd kill with a vacation rental tax is affordable housing, because I perceive that a major driver in the affordability crisis here is that vacation rentals are much more profitable (and much less risky) than renting to people who actually live here. If you make vacation rentals a little bit less profitable some of those homes will end up in the long-term rental market. Note that you are taking money out of the property owner's pockets when you do this, which may or may not be okay with you.

[Fun CH]

Pearl, The FOP, in the feasibility study, says that it will mostly likely need to issue bond debt to build the Mega Spa. That of course contradicts their letter to the editor.

Prop 1 isn't about building a pool. It's about establishing a non-voter accountable, taxpayer funded Metropolitan Park District complete with 5 non-elected Park Board commissioners.

David, you will get more exercise in your own home on a stationary bike or treadmill than driving to the Winthop mega spa. Staying home will also cut down on greenhouse gas emissions and other pollutants that will contribute to our poor air quality during times of smoke. That's especially true if you have to drive a diesel truck to get to the spa.

Swimming only Burns about 230 calories per hour. How many people even swim for that long? Most splash around.

A stationary bike is better for building muscle and I found that it's easier on my arthritic bone on bone knee than swimming. If I bump up the intensity on a stationary bike I can burn about 800-1000 calories per hour for my body weight.

"A vigorous 30 minute workout on a "stationary bike workout burns approximately 315 calories for a 125-pound person, 378 calories for a 155-pound person, and 441 calories for a 185-pound person"

https://www.themanual.com/fitness/how-m ... d%20person.

There is also a commercial gym in Winthrop if you require the social aspects if working out. Or invite a friend over to work out.

Why should low income tax payers pay to give you the same smoke-free experience for 1 hour at a mega spa that you could get at home where you won't encounter building capacity limits and turned away or put on a waiting list to get in.

[Jingles]

Pearl another one that learned to swim in a lake only problem I encountered was getting tangled in the weeds when I fell out of a boat fishing, thankfully my uncle freed me with an oar

[PAL]

David, what I read somewhere is that they do plan to use the matching fund idea and a capital campaign. But we must think about the yearly maintanane costs, I had read $500,000. Is that sustainable in this Valley. What it boils down to for me is don't put this on the backs of the property owners, some of which are not wealthy.
There are risk factors with bodies of water. I received the most injuries from other kids when in a pool. Kids horse around when no one is looking.
And I have had to fight for my life(it felt like it) when an older boy was trying to dunk me and hold me under water. My knee ended up connecting with his jaw, when I was struggling, and he went away howling. Have also had a collision while doing the back stroke by someone not paying attention and had crossed lanes.
I learned to swim in a lake and I never encountered any problems mentioned above.
If this passes, I will be sending that portion of my property tax bill to...those that want an indoor mega spa.

[mister_coffee]

Also worth a read:

https://medium.com/wise-well/where-have ... 417f2fbe52

Something that did stick out from the above to think about:

A reduction in publicly available pools is also thought to contribute to the low rates of swimming ability, especially among Black people and people of low income. Based on an American Red Cross survey, 79% of children in families making less than $50,000 a year cannot swim or have low swimming abilities. By race and ethnicity, 64% of Black children, 45% of Hispanic, and 40% of white children can’t swim or have low ability.

When it gets hot, as with the extreme heat waves of 2023, drownings increase. With the exception of small children age 4 and younger, more drownings occur in natural water sources than in pools. Risk factors associated with these drownings include a lack of access to safe places to swim, people with low or no swimming abilities, alcohol use, and other risk factors.

Rural areas, many of which have significant natural water sources and few public pools, have drowning rates 1.4x higher than urban areas...

[mister_coffee]

Sitting in the vile grim smoke, unable to exercise outside, has given me time to brood about this.

What has occurred to me is that, given the right groundwork, a year-round indoor pool might be achievable.

Hear me out.

First assumption: we can likely get matching dollars for the money we raise other ways. This seems likely given the amount of "build back better" (or whatever it is being called) money sloshing around. No reason we couldn't grab a nice chunk of it. So if we can put together $10MM we can get the other $10MM.

Second assumption: a private capital campaign, similar to the Sunny M campaign recently ran by the Conservancy, could raise $5MM.

That would leave us taxpayers holding the bag for $5MM. A lot less scary that $20MM. Now it is reasonable to assume that would be financed via bonds. If we assume 20 year bonds at the current realistic interest rates, that works out to about $400k per year. If there are 10000 properties in the taxation district, that is an average tax hit of $40 -- or about what a bag of groceries costs at Hanks these days. I also note that most full-time homeowners here with fixed or limited incomes will be paying far less than the average on taxes.

So my conclusion is that financing the construction of a pool, if done properly and competently, is doable by this community. Even for the fancy pants pool being proposed it still seems doable. My own feeling is that a better proposal might still meet all the needs, and if we had direct access to real expertise on how to build a working pool (rather than rely on estimates from consultants and contractors) we might cut that capital cost even further.

Similar arguments can be made about O&M. There are a lot of swimming pools in Washington. I really doubt they all cost $1MM per year to operate and maintain. A lot of high schools have indoor pools, and again I really doubt many of them are dropping that kind of coin on maintaining a pool. So again to make a realistic proposal we need access to real expertise on how to run a pool.