Aquatics Center R.I.P.
Last night the New Haven Council voted down the financing for the Aquatic Center 5-2. It wasn't a surprise, unfortunately we've known for weeks how the vote would turn out. Mayor McDonald did a good job keeping things under control considering the extreme differing opinions in the room. It seemed like the opinions were fairly balanced in the room between "do it" and "don't do it", with a slight margin in favor of the project. There were heartfelt and intelligent comments both ways. The majority of people who don't want the Aquatic Center are still in favor of replacing the pool. But there's where the issue lies. This entire project has been a balancing act between spending more up front to make it an attraction - or spending less and possibly having to subsidize it more because of lack of interest. I think the Park Board came up with a very good business plan and compromise - obviously five of the Council members didn't.
So where do we go now? That could be a problem. There are a lot of issues that will affect this issue.
There were so many people last night saying that we shouldn't spend so much money for a facility that's only open 3 months a year. But that's the idea. That's when our kids have little else to do. That's when we need to find ways to keep them entertained in a wholesome, healthy environment.
I don't blame the council members who voted against the project. I'm sure they felt they were doing what they felt was correct. This project wasn't perfect. There were a lot of things that still needed work. But that's how projects are. I was willing to believe in the Park Board's capacity to figure out solutions to the issues that still needed addressing. Hopefully, they'll rebound and come up with an alternative that will make more people happy. Let's keep up the discussion. Maybe someone will come up with the "perfect" plan.
So where do we go now? That could be a problem. There are a lot of issues that will affect this issue.
#1 How long will they be able to keep Jury Pool open. Could be a year or two. Most likely not. There are major structural problems that can't be addressed with band-aids. At some point it will have to be closed and not reopened.
#2 Will the Park Board members and Director want to put themselves through this again? They spent countless hours on meetings and research over the past couple years. Their research and public meetings pointed them in this direction. Now they're told no, this isn't a good idea. There were some pretty discouraged people at the meeting last night. I wouldn't be surprised if they agree now with the people who say "fill it in".
#3 We might of just missed any opportunity for bonding the project. With Governor Daniel's proposed new tax plans, it's uncertain how local bonding issues will be affected. His plan would cut property taxes, but raise other taxes (sales and income) to make up for it. How those taxes will be distributed is unknown. But it's a fair guess that very little will be allocated to community quality of life projects.
Losing Jury Pool would be a very sad thing for New Haven. It's been a part of why New Haven is a great place to raise a family for a long time. I know my wife and I really appreciated the pool and craft programs when our son was growing up. I'd really like to see that still available for new families in our community.#2 Will the Park Board members and Director want to put themselves through this again? They spent countless hours on meetings and research over the past couple years. Their research and public meetings pointed them in this direction. Now they're told no, this isn't a good idea. There were some pretty discouraged people at the meeting last night. I wouldn't be surprised if they agree now with the people who say "fill it in".
#3 We might of just missed any opportunity for bonding the project. With Governor Daniel's proposed new tax plans, it's uncertain how local bonding issues will be affected. His plan would cut property taxes, but raise other taxes (sales and income) to make up for it. How those taxes will be distributed is unknown. But it's a fair guess that very little will be allocated to community quality of life projects.
There were so many people last night saying that we shouldn't spend so much money for a facility that's only open 3 months a year. But that's the idea. That's when our kids have little else to do. That's when we need to find ways to keep them entertained in a wholesome, healthy environment.
I don't blame the council members who voted against the project. I'm sure they felt they were doing what they felt was correct. This project wasn't perfect. There were a lot of things that still needed work. But that's how projects are. I was willing to believe in the Park Board's capacity to figure out solutions to the issues that still needed addressing. Hopefully, they'll rebound and come up with an alternative that will make more people happy. Let's keep up the discussion. Maybe someone will come up with the "perfect" plan.
Unfortunately it sounds like this is a case where the vocal minority was able to impact the decision makers and undermine the tireless efforts of numerous citizens.
I do not live in New Haven, but I was EXCITED about the prospect of having a project like this in the area. Ok, so maybe people could argue that it is easy to be excited about something when you're not the one paying for it. But let me tell you this: my wife and I are both young professionals and we have children. In the next year or two we'll be looking to move, and we were seriously thinking about New Haven because (until last night) it appeared to be a city of progress.
I'm disappointed that some of the council members used their constituency as an excuse for voting the way that they did. Not ONE of them actually talked to all of the people in their district to find out what the majority in the community wanted. But they were quick to make grand speeches about how they had to represent "their constituents." So my question is, what are the people who spoke in FAVOR of the project? The crowd seemed to be pretty evenly split last night.
Did any of the council members who voted against the project state WHY they were voting against it and then offer any alternatives? Some said that they were in favor of building just a new pool, but then they voted down the ordinance completely...instead of amending the ceiling to a lower amount.
I truly feel sorry for the people who spent so much time working on this project. It is so difficult to engage citizens in a long-term process and to maintain momentum as long as they had. How can we expect these folks to keep volunteering their time...knowing that there efforts will simply be thwarted by naysayers?
It's too bad that the elections are already over, because New Haven needs to elect some new "leaders" with real vision for the community. The attitude of "my job is to oppose anything that costs money" is going to put the city right back where it was several years ago.
Reply to this
I would like to comment on what Eric White said on this blog dated November 14th.My name is Ron Steinman and I am a City Councilman At Large for the City of New Haven.You stated council members that voted against the project gave no reason for their vote.That is an untrue statement.If you were listening,Mr White,you would have heard me say that I was concerned about how we were going to get 500-600 cars and 900-1200 people in and out of the park in a safe manner.Have you been to the park and seen the situation?
I have gone to every meeting but one since this project has been brought to the table.I have heard ALL the concerns both for and against the project at those meetings.I have also visited all 3 of the cities that we were using as an example for our aquatic center.I have seen how they were laid out and how everything flowed at these parks.I saw these aquatic centers were all on a main highway, all had mega parking lots, and all were connected to other entities such as a city park, river greenway, or a city complex.
I brought those concerns to the Park Board.They did look into the entrance situation and said they would contact the shopping plaza and the church.In my opinion,an easement to put a driveway in to connect to the park is necessary.They did their homework on that.I also stated at those meetings that I could not vote in favor of the project until that situation was resolved and in writing.Well,as seen Tuesday night,the plaza is "willing to talk" and the church had a 50/50 split vote.By the way, "WE" just may have divided that congregation and that is not cool!!!If we did,then I personally,as a city councilman,want to apologize to the church and its congregation.So the entrance was a BIG issue with me.It was not a matter of the Park Board not looking into it and or not having faith or confidence in the Board that it could not have been resolved.I felt,at that point in time,and with the church vote the way it was,the entrance issues could not be resolved fast enough to keep this project on course for the construction schedule.I have all the confidence in the Board but there were alot of unanswered questins that in my opinion needed to be answered.
I also want you to know that over all that time,I talked to a tremendous amount of people,both citizens and the business community, about the project.I have lived in New Haven since 1966.I have raised my family, own real estate, and own a long established business in this community.I have been active in many civic organizations including New Haven Chamber,JC's,and New Haven Festival.I do my shopping and attend church in New Haven.I am honored and privileged to now be a city councilman and represent the citizens of New Haven and don't take that task lightly.I hope you would see that maybe,just maybe,I have a "pulse" of what the citizens have told me.
CONTINUED ON NEXT BLOG PAGE
Reply to this
Just so you know, we have 3 pools for 14,000 citizens in the New Haven area. In the Fort Wayne area, there are 4 pools for 250,000 citizens. So it is not that we don't have pools in the area for our families to swim. I think that with concerns I have, we may just want to step back and take a look at this project again. I do believe that the people at the meeting did give the Park Board and Council some guidance on what the next step should be. The paper Saturday said that we said nothing and I disagree... the people and the council gave them an alternative: Replace the pool only!!! Now what that means (I don't know) but I can tell you what the people have told me. They say dig up the old pool and replace it along with the pumps and slide. Also, remodeling of the building is needed to bring it up to ADA code. Now the response to that is "why do we want to do that and still lose money?" Well, Mr. White, you seem to be an intelligent person. Let me give a lesson in Business 101. Let me give you some figures. We lose $73,000 a year running Jury pool. We charge $1.50 to swim. Ft. Wayne charges $3.00-$5.00 to get into its pools. If we would raise our fees to let's say $2.50 to swim (and still be under Ft. Wayne), maybe we would not lose so much...right?Also, if we redo the pool, I do believe that the maintenance would be much, much lower than in past years. I was told that the city parks were supposed to not make money and are a service to the citizens of a community.I AGREE but we do offer free service to the community; and a few of them are parks, ball diamonds, soccer fields, tennis courts, and picnic areas. The Parks Dept offers different types of family programs and maintains our park lawns and city flower beds giving the city great eye appeal. So maybe raising the fee to a higher level will maybe get us closer to breaking even on the pools. Mr. White, we have one of the BEST Park Depts in the state and we are known for our parks throughout the area. I would put our parks up to any in the state. And I would hope in the near future that they will be able to add the community center for their crown jewel of the Parks Dept. Some of the most dedicated employees and volunteers around work in and with the Parks Dept. Also, Mr. White, I also take issue with your comment about our "leaders" not being progressive enough and that you and your family were considering a move to New Haven but have doubts. Let me just hit on a few things that you may not know since you live in Ft. Wayne. We have a state of the art fire station with some of the best trained firemen and volunteers in the state. We have an EMT AND paramedic program with highly skilled employees and volunteers. Both fire and EMS have emergency response times at around 4 minutes or less.
CONTINUED ON NEXT BLOG PAGE
Reply to this
We have a state of the art police station with a 911 call center and 20 highly skilled and trained officers who are out on our streets 24/7 keeping our citizens safe. We also have one of the lowest crime rates in the state. We also have a state of the art administration building with great employees who do all the paperwork to keep the city running smoothly. We also have a state of the art street dept with trained employees that can multitask in their jobs to keep the city well maintained. All of these departments and others are run by some of the most dedicated people the citizens could have. Now let's not forget a few more items that make our city what it is: water and sewer separation, and a revitalized downtown which is the city's crown jewel. With all of this you can add the New Haven festival that provides family fun and entertainment every year. Our school system and many wonderful churches add even more to New Haven's wonderful qualities. I will also add that we have a smoking ordinance that allows the business community to control their own destiny and make their own business decisions. We have a citywide trash pickup service that keeps several garbage trucks off the streets during the day and helps keep our city clean.
Does this take tax dollars to run .....YES. Did it raise our taxes ...YES, AND it was ALL done with public input!!! But this is the forward thinking of our past and current "leaders". I could go on and on but if you want to enjoy an Aquatic Center then let me give you a hint. Jump into your SUV and head south on I69 for about 100 miles and turn right on I465 and go about 6 or 7 miles and turn right on US31 and go another 6 or 7 miles until you see a sign that says "Welcome to Carmel". I hear thru the grapevine that they have a really neat water park. Meantime, I am VERY happy in New Haven serving to the best of my ability the GREAT citizens of this community.
Regards,
Ron Steinman
New Haven Council At Large
Reply to this
Councilman Steinman,
First, I just wanted to say that I appreciate the fact that you are using this electronic forum as a means to engage citizens in a public debate over the issues.
Since you were kind enough to "educate" me on business 101, I would like to return the favor by giving you a lesson in Civics 101.
As a council member, you are part of the legislative body for the City of New Haven. Your responsibilities are enact new (and modify existing) legislation and to appropriate money (passing the budget, approving bonds, etc.)
Your job on Tuesday night was to decide whether to approve, deny, or modify the bond that was presented to you. Your responsibility in the matter was to ascertain whether or not the citizens within your city should incur debt.
Your job wasn't to dissect various components of the proposal and decide individual specifics of the project! That's why you have professional staff, a steering committee, consultants, public input mechanisms, and a Park Board. At most, your job was to say that the scope of the project was going to mean incurring a debt that was too costly for the citizens to pay.
You had an opportunity for input on the specifics, just like everyone else. You shouldn't be making financial decisions for the entire city based on your own personal wants and needs, which you admitted to doing in your posts above.
Also, Mr. Steinman, you say that you were in favor of the replacing the existing pool and raising rates to cover the cost of operations. But you VOTED AGAINST the only funding mechanism that was being presented to you. If you believed that the debt was too much for the city to incur, but still wanted to replace the pool, you could have amended the bond to a lesser amount.
What are you going to do if your Parks Department, feeling defeated, decides not to come back and ask for money to replace the pool? Will you blame them for closing the pool and say that it is there fault? I know that if I were in that position, I wouldn't bring any project back to a subjective council for fear of having a project voted down over something like having too many urinals in the mens changing room!
The fate of that facility rested entirely in your hands and council members decided that it would be more fun to play project manager and rip the whole thing apart than it would to give the Parks Department the tools that they needed to do something...anything on the site.
When you simply voted against the bond, you voted to close the pool...whether you believe it or not.
Reply to this
Oh, also I forgot that I wanted to respond to this statement made by Mr. Steinman:
,i."...but if you want to enjoy an Aquatic Center then let me give you a hint. Jump into your SUV and head south on I69 for about 100 miles and turn right on I465 and go about 6 or 7 miles and turn right on US31 and go another 6 or 7 miles until you see a sign that says "Welcome to Carmel". I hear thru the grapevine that they have a really neat water park."
Thank you for the wonderful suggestion. I might have to give that idea some consideration for next summer. I'm sure that the City of Carmel will be happy to have me and my family come down and spend money in their community.
Reply to this
As a New Haven resident I have to commend Mr. White for his intelligent commentary. This refreshing level of insight is welcome to New Haven and I would welcome him and his family as my neighbor. I’m a lifelong resident of New Haven and have seen too many years of “small town” politics which has been representative of the vocal minority and exclusively representative of the core group who hasn’t accomplished anything for too many years. Over the past eight years I have been inspired by the fresh leadership of Mayor McDonald and the projects he initiated after years of apathetic rule. Leadership takes courage and vision. Despite the progress our city has made, apathy and small town politics are still with us. A city isn’t just about police and fire protection or new sidewalks and street lights; it’s about opportunity for all citizens. Let’s assume we are a community catering to the retired segment of our society. We can fund those projects for this class and alienate young families. This endeavor will work for a period of years, but will inevitably produce a dying community.
Mr. Steinman purports to be an expert on fiscal and recreation matters. As Mr. White pointed out so well, New Haven has professional staff and a Park Board who are experts as well. Mr. Steinman states that he attended the Park Board meetings, but overturned their recommendations based on his constituent’s feelings. I wonder if Mr. Steinman took the time to share the information from the Park Board with his constituents, or if simply conveyed his personal biases. A representative is supposed to re-present the information he or she receives, not just sit at a table and spew personal feelings. Representation requires research and education. Based on Mr. Steinman’s position and vote, he has found himself in a quandary. He states he is in support of the pool, but voted no on the ordinance which would have been necessary for any level of reconstruction of the Jury Pool. The logical question is “Does Mr. Steinman understand the basic principles of his office or is living up to the stereotype of politicians?”
Reply to this
I would like to comment on what Mr. White and Jason said in their reply blog.
When spending 5.5 million dollars of the taxpayers' money, I would hope that all the issues that have been brought up in the past blog would have been resolved. That in NO WAY takes away from the great job the park board has done. Those in my opinion were big issues. That had nothing to do with whether I was an "expert" on recreation matters but it does have a reflection on how to spend that kind of money. That is not to say the entrance issue could not have been resolved and the money found to redo US 930 for the new entrance. Stop and think if you were a business owner and going to spend 5.5 million dollars on a facility...would you do it with major issues unresolved? I wish you two would take the politics out of it and look at it as a business decision. We as a city council are the "fiscal" body of the taxpayers' money.
So let's cut to the chase of the matter. I agree whole heartedly with what Mayor McDonald said the night of the meeting. In so many words, he said that if we did this project now, what are the chances of getting the community center in the near future.
So as I said before. The park board right now has the momentum going to replace the pool only without any real opposition from the council. I would hope they would move forward on the pool. I also would hope since alot of the people are thinking about the community center with an indoor pool, that they would take all of that into consideration in the near future.
Mr. White, I will adress your "Civics 101" and Jason your "basic principles of office and small town politics" with you at a later date. And yes, Jason, I did talk to the citizens. I'm glad I did because alot of people did not know what was happening. Some thought it was about the community cneter with an indoor pool. I would also encourage both of you to run for office in four years. Also, attend council meetings and give input.
I received an email from Mr. Craig Dellinger "The Blog Master". He said if my blogs were going to be as long as the last one, he would have to put them in as a guest column. I told him I would not rattle on with the next one and get to the point (did I do OK with this one, Craig????....smile)
Ron Steinman
Reply to this
My name is Phil Marx, and I am a resident of Fort Wayne. This past summer, I attended a public information meeting which was hosted by the Parks Department. I wanted to see how this issue was handled, by both citizens and elected officials, as compared to our Harrison Square project.
During this meeting, there were approximately eighty people in attendance. I was impressed that almost one-third of those present stood to speak that night. I was also impressed that the host of the meeting (Ken Wilkinson) stated at the beginning that he would stay as long as it took to allow everyone to speak.
Concerning the citizens comments, I noticed some people were unrealistic in their expectations. They want a newer, and larger, pool. But they don't want user fees or taxes to rise. There's no other way to summarize that than ridiculous. Of course, I found this same thing occurring here in Fort Wayne with the Harrison Square debate.
Regarding those who had reasonable views, there were a variety of opinions. These differed on how expensive the project should be, how it should be paid for, and discussion of the technical details.
Although I was impressed with both the city's presentation and the citizen's participation, it appeared to me that this would likely become New Haven's "Harrison Square" issue. Given the comments on this blog, that appears to be the case now.
I find it interesting that Councilman Steinman seems mostly concerned about the technical details, rather than the cost itself. This is similar to our Councilman Smith's views on Harrison Square. He thought it was a waste, mostly, because we already have a ballpark. Then, resigning himself to the fact that the Council was probably going to approve it, he suggested that placing it along the river-front would be a better option than that proposed. Because Councilman Smith did not unequivocally support this project from the beginning, his potentially useful comments were frequently disregarded.
I find it interesting that at one point, Councilman Steinman is criticized for voting against the project without giving an explanation why. Then, when he states his reasons, he is told it is not his job to dissect the project, he is simply to vote yes or no.
There are advisory boards in place that are supposed to do the detailed work. These details are then put together into a comprehensive plan which is presented to the City Council. Of course, Councilman Steinman's ultimate job is to say yes or no to their proposal. But given the strong opinions of people on all sides of this issue, it would be irresponsible of him not to explain himself.
Reply to this