Jury Pool - Guest Editorial by Kara Laughlin
I could easily rehash all of the reasons a new Jury Pool is good for New Haven, but the opposition has just one reason it is bad- it increases taxes. Their blue signs say it all. They have a scare tactic to go after your pocketbooks. They don’t even say what you’re voting “no” for. And what they certainly will not tell you is that it averages just about one dollar a month per household. Whether you would use the pool or not, this is a small price to pay for an investment in our city.
The opposition to the pool has also started spreading the rumor that if we build a new pool, we will not get a community center. This is not true. The whole pool/community center debate started back in 2005 when the park department knew that Jury Pool was not going to make it through many more seasons. This was not because it wasn’t taken care of, but because concrete and machinery does not last forever. At that time it formed an advisory committee to research ideas on what to do, and I was fortunate enough to be on that committee.
We did research the whole possibility of an indoor pool but we found several things: It is not just a little more expensive to build, it is WAY more expensive to build. It also costs more to maintain because not only are you heating the pool, but also the air in a huge room, lighting a huge room, and the chlorine damages the whole big room. Our research also showed that even indoor pools are not used as much as you would think in the winter months because the kids are back in school and doing school activities and other sports. You would be paying to staff and run a facility that rarely gets used during the day.
So after discussing all of this, we decided to keep an indoor recreation facility and Jury Pool separate. In addition, the community survey supported keeping a pool at Jury AND building a community center, so we know there is interest in both. (Out of 1191 responders 50% wanted both; the rest supported just one or nothing at all.)
Work on a community center is still in progress, as far as I know. I believe it’s possible that if we can get the pool project to go through, the community center will be MORE LIKELY to get built because it would demonstrate to potential donors that citizens are willing to make an investment in their community first. Basically, who would want to throw money into a big community project if you know citizens don’t even support community improvements?
Back to the pool…Then comes the debate on what to put at Jury since it has passed the point of patching and repairs. It costs almost as much to replace it exactly as is (some improvements would still have to be made to meet modern code and ADA specs.) And the survey also showed that people would NOT pay more to swim at a new facility unless it had more features. Research from around the country shows this same thing. To draw people in and break even, or to make money in a season, you have to have more amenities.
I encourage people to ask the blue team for their evidence, concrete numbers, references and research on the project. The park department has theirs.
Be wary if you want to sign against a new pool. Learn the real facts first at savejurypool.com. Vote yes and sign the yellow petition. Support the future of New Haven and Adams Twp.
Kara Heine Laughlin
As my representative Roger, I don't appreciate you displaying a sign in your yard, personal vehicle and going door to door misinforming people.
Have you forgotten your platform for 2007 election? "You lied" Link attached to remind you!........ I can assure you that your opinion does not represent the majority of the the people you are representing. Your stance on the pool issue is totally wrong and you and your fellow supporters will find out shortly.
Council members that support Jury Pool THANK YOU! We need more people on the council that represent for the people not against the people...
http://ourdems.org/clayton/
Regards,
Kari L. Shearer
9583 Carmondy Crossing
"Platform" One of the big dollar issues on the current agenda is the Jury Aquatic Center, at 1720 Glencoe Blvd in New Haven. The proposal is to enhance the current area with a new pool to include swimming lanes for laps and swim team, slides, splash pad and shaded area, low diving board if allowed, locker room with privacy, lockable lockers, family or assisted changing area and ADA compliance. This proposal includes swimming lessons, water exercise, and water walking and the possibility of scuba classes, water sports including volleyball, underwater hockey and basketball. Most people I have talked to support moving ahead with the idea and keeping it in the same location as the old Jury Pool.
I believe this proposal will move Jury Pool into the 21st Century. These improvements and upgrades will help improve the quality of life in our community with teaching safety habits and skills of life savings techniques along with making memories for the children of all ages of our community. To help make the Jury Aquatic Center a success we need to continue with our comprehensive pedestrian walkways plan, which suggest adding walkways to Moeller, Hartzell, Landin, Green, Seiler and other roads in our community as necessary. These walkways will not only keep our children safe on their way to the Aquatic Center but will keep walkers, joggers and bicyclist safer regardless of their destination.
Reply to this
Good one Kari!!! I think he is now more interested in keeping his seat than representing the people that put him there. We are now seeing and hearing what lengths Floyd Ball and his Blue Crew are going to in order to have New Haven stay the way it is and has been for 20 years. I am one of the "New" residents that married someone who decided to return back to New Haven to live and raise our family. We use to live in Fort Wayne near McMillen Pool. We CHOSE to go to Jury Pool instead because I thought it was nicer than McMillen's and Matt had such wonderful memories of going to the pool himself when he was a kid. Matt always got a kick out watching Josey swim in the same pool that he did when he was younger. Just as Kari said, BIG THANK YOU to the council members that have New Haven's future in mind when they vote, not their own political future. It should be about the people of New Haven, not the few that fund your campaigns for your own bottom to keep the council seats warm. Let the people of New Haven decide for themselves what's best for New Haven and vote YES/YELLOW in the next 4 weeks.
Reply to this
Hi all,
I do just have some factual questions - - maybe someone can clarify these for me? I realize they may sound critical but I am undecided for now and want more info.
Thanks for any reply!
- - Linda
1. What exactly will the added annual property taxes be? I have read somewhere between $14 - $45. Say, for a house valued at New Haven's average home value?
2. What exactly will the entry fee be per person? Is there a lower rate for children?
3. Will there be a season pass with a lower rate / per family? Is this for sure, or just a best guess at this point?
4. What will the rate be at the remaining pool(s) in New Haven? Still $2 for the foreseeable future?
5. I have read that New Haven Pool will be closed once they open the renovated Jury Pool. Is that still the plan?
Are there any plans to keep it for lap swimming / water exercise classes?
6. How is the budget structured to pay for upkeep / maintenance at the renovated Jury Pool? I notice that the "baby pool" at New Haven has been closed for at least 2 years. If the baby pool is too pricey to maintain, I worry that things may deteriorate at N.H. Parks' other facilities.
Reply to this
Linda, all good questions!
1. Median home price in New Haven according to cnnmoney.com is $89,152. that would mean an annual tax payment of $14. Many of the blue petition carriers who are against the pool live on main street where the monthly tax increase is 71 cents!
2. entry fee is predicted to be around $3.50, not sure if there is a lower price for kids in the works.
3. Yes, season passes are totally in the plan, and if you are a NH/adams twp. resident your single or family pass will be even cheaper to offset the taxes you pay.
4. The small pools will stay cheaper, and 5. plan to stay open for ppl who want a less expensive option.
6. The problem right now is Jury is in such bad shape it makes it more expensive to maintain- looses water overnight, requires more chemicals b/c the filtration system is bad, has an inefficient heater, etc. And that's why they chose to leave it closed this summer. The regular budget should cover maintenance if a more modern facility is built- and thats what makes it almost impossible to just "refurbish" what is there- which is what some naysayers are wanting.
As for the older baby pools- there wasn't really deterioration, but new water testing standards combined with the old filtration technology made it hard to keep them clean enough for the board of health. According to the maintenance director, the expense was in paying for a lot of water testing for the baby pools and there have not been any complaints about the baby pool at NH being closed. A new children's pool at Jury is designed to be on its own filtration system to get the proper turnover and prevent similar problems.
And as far as deterioration in the parks in general, unfortunately, there isn't much that is subject to the elements or that is mechanical in nature that will last forever. Cars are a beautiful example, even if you do all of your routine maintenance, you're probably not going to be driving the same thing you are now in 40 years!
Hope this helps!
Reply to this
Linda, Kara did a great job answering your questions and I will give you some additional information on 5 and 6.
5. On closing of New Haven pool. I have suggested to the Park Board that New Haven pool be closed when Jury pool can be reopened and the Board has not acted on that. With Jury pool being closed next season we will need to open New Haven pool to provide swim lessons and to have another pool for swimmers. New Haven is in need of some repairs before we can open it and hopefully we will be able to do those repairs. After Jury pool is reopened, the Park Board will have to address the closing of any pool based on attendance, repairs needed and future budget cuts that we are told will come in 2011 and 2012.
6. We have a pool fund in our park budget that each year we are to deposit $10,000 for major repairs or renovation. Unfortunately do to increased expenses that is an area of our budget that gets cut. If we can build a pool that lessens the negative impact on our budget we can again start saving money for future repairs.
I hope this answers your questions.
Feel free to call me anytime with park questions at 749-2212
You can also find information at www.savejurypool.com
Thanks for taking the time to ask the questions.
Mike Clendenen
New Haven-Adams Township Parks Dept.
Reply to this
I do not know why I even thought to look at the tax summary that came with my property tax bill over a month ago, but I am glad I did. Firstly, I was just curious about how much am I actually paying for the New Haven Parks Department and secondly, how last year, this year and the probable amount next year if the Jury Pool bond is approved (I really really hope it will be). I am not afraid to broadcast how much those amounts are. Our home was assessed at $120,300 in 2008. We paid NH Parks $70.20 in taxes for 2008. In 2009, our home was assessed at $121,300 and we are to pay $51.39. I am waiting to hear back if the decrease is because the Parks Department budget did not have the expense of the upkeep and maintainance for Jury Pool because it was closed. But still, I am hearing from several YES people that are willing to pay an extra $100 on their property taxes to have Jury done right and are shocked by the tax amount that are expected to be added if the bond is approved. $22-$30 has not garnering the "sticker shock" that the Blue Crew is trying to instill in the property owners and registered voters hearts and minds. Of the 150 people that I have talked to, these are the top concerns voiced: 1.) How much is the tax going to go up for me? 2.) Is THAT what the blue signs are for? 3.) Where can I get more information? 4.) Why is the decision to fix Jury Pool still going on after 2 years? What's the problem? 5.) What can I do? Of those same 150, I tried to get signatures from about 100 of them: 25 households, they were not home, 25 flatly told us NO, and the remaining 50 have signed or are still deciding (using the Yellow pamphlets and internet sources I gave them). Only ONE person asked where can he sign the blue petition. That gives everyone an idea of how it is going for me on Seiler Road (between Adams Center and Hartzell). I only have 14 more houses to make my first visit and I predict at least 5-7 more signatures. And I am walking most of it. Everyone that I have talked to have not had a visit from the Blue petitioners. I have even had people from Highland Terrace, Meadowbrook, Lakes of Scarborough and farther down Seiler ask why no one has come to their neighborhood. I told them just wait. The YELLOW counterpart petitioners are making their rounds very thoroughly and we are walking from door to door and that takes time. If you have not signed the Yellow YES petition and want to, email at SaveJuryPool.com and tell us what street you are on and we'll be sure to cover it.
Reply to this
Hi again,
Thanks to Kara and Mike for answering my questions!
I guess I am still left with a couple of lingering thoughts. Let me quote a part of Kara's essay, then ask a question:
"Back to the pool…Then comes the debate on what to put at Jury since it has passed the point of patching and repairs. It costs almost as much to replace it exactly as is (some improvements would still have to be made to meet modern code and ADA specs.) And the survey also showed that people would NOT pay more to swim at a new facility unless it had more features. Research from around the country shows this same thing. To draw people in and break even, or to make money in a season, you have to have more amenities."
Here's the question: Why DO we have to charge people more (thus necessitating bigger amenities)? If maintenance costs are going to be less in the future than now (because of the current problems), why do we have to charge more?
My concern is that for a family of four or five, the entrance admission for one visit would be almost the same as the annual average property tax burden, right?
I see that in the last year that Jury was open, there were 21,000 visitors.
They all came then without the extra amenities. This would have brought in about $42,000 in admission fees.
Another thought, I see that in the maintenance budget there is about $25,000 allotted to the craft sheds.
Perhaps that could be tweaked somewhat? I have seen the craft sheds in use, and it's a nice feature, but that seems like a big chunk of change for that service. Any figures on how many people they serve? Could some of those funds be moved to pool maintenance / repair?
I know that there has been discussion that replacing Jury Pool "as is" (or close to it)would be nearly as expensive as building with better amenities, but would admission prices have to be so high then?
Also, on other postings on this blog I have seen references to Tipp City Ohio, and that their pool is a "failure". I noticed on their website that they seem to outsource their staffing to Cincinnati Pool Management Inc. Could anyone comment on whether their pool has been a success, financially or otherwise?
Thanks for any comments / replies!
- - Linda
Reply to this
Good Morning Linda
I think you have asked some great questions. I don't know you but I would like to at least answer one of the questions you ask.That is what could be put at Jury Park.
From the very beginning I have gone to meetings and one of the very first meetings I ask the board if they considered a real nice splash pad. I got no for an answer and then later on I was told by the previous director that they really didn't want one and that they were invested way to much with this project.
This is what I had suggested. "remodel" Jury Park by making a really neat splash pad and update all the play ground equipment, add restrooms (like at Moser Park) and add maybe a few more picnic tables and maybe a pavilion and maybe some other things that are kid friendly.
Now can you just visualize family reunions and company picnics at the park. Parents would not have to worry about paying for the kids to swim because all the park activities would be free other then renting the park. Or parents just going down during the day and evenings and or weekends just to have a picnic as a family. A splash pad baseball diamond, play ground equipment, tennis, and grass to play on at no charge.
A splash pad is virtually maintenance free. You turn it on in the spring and winterize it in the Fall and forget it. Now I am sure there is more to it then that but what I am saying is that it would not require lifeguards, staff and pumps and a lot of long term maintenance.
Then my thoughts would be to turn our attention to a much bigger picture for the future of New Haven. I would then take the 3.5 million dollar bond and combine it with a much bigger project that we could use 365 days a year and go for a Community Center and make that our crown jewel for New Haven.
If you have noticed a lot of cities have gone to splash pads and not pools in the parks. One reason is that we are a mobile society and people can go to these large water parks in our area.
This was one idea that I know of that was brought up.
Just my thoughts
Thanks
Ron Steinman
Council At Large
Reply to this
Linda- I don't have all the answers on the parks budget, but Mike may be able to get on and give you some more specifics.
As far as a cost increase goes- theoretically you could make admission free- just have the pool as a service to the community, but then you would be charging every taxpayer more- or transfer even more of the park's budget to supporting a pool. Charging admission at least puts some of the burden on the users of the pool. I do believe, however, that he current plan is to offer family passes at a reduced rate to taxpayers so that it would more than cover the tax increase. Same theory on if you would replace as is (projected to be 2 to 2.5 mil) and you would charge people the same as now for entry, but then the parks department would have to ask for more money from taxes. Where is a good balance? we're not sure, but a lot of the conclusions we came to were because of that community survey. 79% were willing to pay 2 bucks to swim at the current facility, but even raising it to 2.50 61% of people said they would NOT pay it if the facility was the same. but if you gave the option of paying 3.50 to "swim at a facility with water slides, lazy river, splash pad, shade structures, water misters, etc." 66% said yes.
Remember, this was a scientific survey done by the outside company Info USA and over 1300 surveys were returned. It is the best sampling of New Haven residents that we have so far. We know you can't make everyone happy, but you can at least try to appease the majority.
It just so happened to also ask the following question about Jury Pool: "If you had to choose only one of the following, which one would you choose?"
Replace with Aquatic center- 38%
Replace with similar pool- 42%
Replace with splash pad- 7%
Demolish with no replacement- 13%
Now Ron, you make some good points on a splash pad, but why would you advocate the option that your constituents LEAST agreed with? I don't think that is what you were elected to do.
Reply to this
Now Kara
I agree with what you said. BUT the thing I was trying to get across is way back in the beginning when I brought this up was the time it needed to be approached differently. How about if they would have said something to the effect that they wanted to make Jury Park a splash pad park and build a Community Center with a pool. That would have been before the survey and all of this going on.Yes after the fact is not the time to do it but if it would have been done before hand I think the survey would have turned out different.
Have a nice day.
Ron
Reply to this
Way back in the beginning when proposals and options were being discussed, the Community Center with pool was discussed. Research was done on all proposals looking at cost of maintenance, sites, use by the community and the cost of running an indoor pool and it was voted down based on the cumulation of facts gathered. I know this has been discussed multiple times and the figures have been shared. I'm sure there are minutes from meetings for you to review since I do not remember seeing you there.
I also know that I have gone to multiple city counsel meetings where Mr. Ball has stated that we should fill the pool in with dirt and make a splash pad. The overall outcry at the meeting should have sent a clear message. The results from the scientific based survey also indicate that this is not an option the NH citizens want. For you to restate this, typifies the situation of elected officials pursuing their personal opinions and not representing their constituents fully.
I fully believe that schools and parks make a community. New businesses look at schools, parks and other amenities before deciding where to establish themselves. New Haven needs to look at the big picture and make our community an area that shines if we want to attract business opportunities and new home owners to our city.
Reply to this