HomeMy WebLinkAbout120423 email Pool (0002)ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Good morning Commissioners and Staff,
Well, this one seems half baked.
Nobody claims there are no benefits to having an aquatic center. Nobody claims that there are no health or social benefits or that there are no educational, recreational or water rescue
training benefits. That is not the issue.
The issues are:
1- Lack of representation for the entire county, except PT (of course).
2- Location.
3- Cost.
For the purposes of this email, I am only going to focus on issue #1.
Do you think it is appropriate or acceptable to form a steering committee made up of all advocates and beneficiaries and which effectively excludes any representation from the residents
of the county as a whole (aside from, if I am to be very generous, maybe the Y and, if you really reach for it, the hospital) and then try to get the whole county to pay for an amenity
they cant afford to use and can't physically access without significant burden? Why are there no representatives on the steering committee who are amplifying the voices of district
2 & 3 residents (more on this in the PS)? Why are all the participants advocating ONLY for a pool to the exclusion of the needs of the guarantors without receipt of their broad feedback?
This county is vast and diverse. We elect officials to advocate for us as a whole and to speak for our concerns and struggles. Greg may like to have a pool, personally. However, he
knows that his district overwhelmingly opposes this proposal and he is elected to represent our interests, as he has clearly stated. We have had no geographically representative participation
or representation and precious little outreach to inform the voters of what is really going on. As soon as a countywide tax became part of the conversation, community reps should have
been included on the steering committee.
I am concerned about the complete lack of awareness of the exclusionary nature of the process and the sense of disconnection to the people. To say it is not equitable is an understatement.
We have had no representation in the conversation at all. Nobody asked most county residents what they think. The public outreach has been abominable and almost nobody had any idea
that this was going to be proposed as a countywide tax. I attend nearly every Monday morning BoCC meeting, and I have been doing this for many years (since before any of you were elected
to this office). Yet, I was completely unaware that there was to be a proposal for a countywide tax until mid-September of this year. If I, a complete junkie for all things BoCC, am
in the dark about this, how can the general public have any idea what is going on?
There is another thing which I find particularly distasteful about this steering committee procedure. It is all private. That's right, almost no public participation is encouraged or
even allowed. The committee wants the public to cough up $40M, initially, and then to be the guarantors into the future, but we are not allowed to attend the meetings. I am trying to
be invited to attend and being met with quite a prickly reception, to understate the affair. It took communication from a commissioner to dampen that tone, but even that does not appear
to have yielded a golden ticket to what should be an open public meeting. Perhaps it will take an act of congress to be blessed with this honor. What's the big secret? You see why this
has a very bad look, right? This may be legal, but it is VERY off-putting. These meetings need to be open to the public if the recommendations are ever going to yield a valid and actionable
proposal which will enjoy public support.
Finally, there is a "survey #3" which has feedback from a mere 321 respondents in a county of 30,000, of which 232 are PT residents and another 29 residents from the next highest respondent
rate (Hadlock/Chim). The results show that 40% want a full buildout and 40% say do nothing. How is it possible that we receive feedback from that few people, fail to offer a countywide
outreach and information campaign, see the anemic support rate, and draw the conclusion that the county voters would consider passing a tax? This math ain't mathing.
Kind regards, Jean
PS I think we should be honest about the favorable opinion from PT residents for this pool. You have been hearing from primarily proponents. The many people I have been speaking to in
PT have a very different opinion. To say that the representation is lacking from district 2 & 3 residents is obvious, but I know you are not hearing from the bulk of PT residents, either.
The steering committee is solely comprised of advocates and salesmen. Of course they will tell you to buy this shiny bauble. Will they tell you the reality of the cost or what it takes
to garner public support? Wasting $110K on a special election which is certain to fail will make us all look ill-prepared and out of touch. The public outreach component cannot be overstated.