HomeMy WebLinkAbout111623 email The PoolALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Heidi—
I am writing to you as both a friend and as a Commissioner and have copied Greg as the Commissioner for our district. When we met briefly on the beach last week I expressed views that
were more reactive than reasoned. Apologies because you deserve better than that. After we talked, I reread the several articles about the City pool in the Free Press as well as the
relevant articles in the PDN and Leader. The content of the Free Press varies widely and sometimes includes commentary that can be fairly described as nutty and even offensive. However,
the articles by Jim Scarantino strike me as data driven, reasoned and careful. I met with Jim Scarantino this week and was impressed with his commitment to journalistic accuracy, public
service and our community.
Unlike the Free Press, the articles in the PDN and Leader are descriptive and conclusory without providing any objective analysis. The references to Free Press articles about the pool
in Leader columns and letters to the editor are dismissive (e.g., “biased”, “right wing”) rather than substantively responsive. I wrote a letter to the editor of the Leader politely
asking that the Leader provide a piece responding on the merits to the Free Press articles but my letter was not printed.
I have now thought through the issues and have concluded that the County should not support, financially or otherwise, the proposed aquatic facility located in Port Townsend.
1. Location. I had never considered a non-City location until you mentioned the idea to me. I understand you are well aware of the advantages of a Hadlock-area location so I won't
recite its merits other than to say that demographics, the immenent growth and development in the county vs the city and the new sewer all strongly favor a Hadlock-area location. In
addition, even accepting the City’s consultant's questionable, if not absurd, usage and pool availability claims, County residents far from the City pool would be compelled to pay for
it. That is just unfair.
2. The Data. A response on the merits to the arguments and factual statements made in Jim Scarantino’s articles is necessary for the Commissioners to make a reasoned and responsible
vote. The only public responses to those articles are personal attacks on Jim Scarantino in the Leader and representatives of the City stating that everything must be done quickly.
What is wrong with objectively looking at the data and considering the factual flaws in the consultant’s report? Why not seriously dive into what appears to be a flawed and sloppy
economic case for the project? What’s the rush? Absent substantive responses from the proponents of the City pool, and there have been none at all, the arguments and data in Jim Scarantino's
articles are compelling.
3. Partnering with the City. Of course citing conversations with friends and neighbors is unscientific polling, but the reality is that County residents outside the City appreciate
being insulated from the City Council and the City administration. Given its resources, the County is well run while the words “well run” do not leap to mind when the City is mentioned.
Potholes aside, the Sims Way trees are up, or down and are still up….the golf course will be closed, or open or turned into a multifunctional wizbang that pleases every loud constituency
sometime.. maybe..if there is money….Cherry Street has now been acknowledged as “an error” by unnamed predecessors even though the current mayor said he do it all over again….and it
is to be sold on unknown “conditions" which will likely make it unsaleable while the proceeds of such sale may or may not be used to pay the bond debt... which was incurred in error
based on consultants’ reports confirming that all would be fine….which brings us to the aquatic center and more consultants and more assurances of certain success. There is a pattern
here and it does not appear to have changed: there is just a new platoon of clowns in the same clown car. It is not comforting to us outlanders that the City is leading this effort,
will manage the project and City residents will be the primary beneficiaries. The City’s track record on these projects is terrible. The City’s financial situation is scary. Jim
Scarantino’s reports are scathing. The County should partner with the City for many good reasons on many good projects but this isn’t one of them.
4. Debt; Guarantee. The County’s ability to incur or guarantee debt is a precious thing. Based on my business experience, I assume the County will be required to co-issue or guarantee
the bond debt for the City pool. Once that capacity is committed it is gone for the decades of the bond term. Such a commitment now will limit the options of future Commissioners,
a significant opportunity cost. Given the anticipated population and economic growth of the County, the County's debt capacity should only be committed for compelling matters that
benefit the whole County. Were I a Commissioner I would not support County involvement in the City pool for this reason alone.
Today’s PDN reports that the City Council has approved the pool project, the proposed sales tax and bond issue and the creation of a County wide Public Facilities District. The next
step is action by the County Commissioners. Prompt and decisive action is a good idea because timely decision making avoids expense, delay, indecision and confusion. I recommend that
the Commissioners meet and advise the City that the County is not going to participate in the City pool project as currently proposed. Maybe there will be other proposals but at least
this proposal should die the quick death it deserves.
I look forward to our next dog day at the beach and removing my no-PTpool signs at my driveway.
.
Best,
Jock
b08a5d8-49塅⼺㵏塅䡃乁䕇䅌卂伯㵕塅䡃乁䕇䄠䵄义卉剔呁噉⁅則問⁐䘨䑙䉉䡏㉆匳䑐呌⼩乃刽䍅偉䕉呎⽓乃㤽㔱㐹ぁ㌱㠴㑅㠶䅃㘱㔰䌲㈱〶䄱㑁ⴲ䉁㠰㕁㡄㐭9