Some people have selective hearing. It has been three months since the aquatic center was proposed. Three front page articles in The Times. A pool backers meeting. There still has been no business case. It is Mr. Schweers who is not listening. We who oppose it are concerned about the financial stability of the town and School District’s fragile budgets. Safety, health and liability problems. Water conservation and the lack of “need” for this center. Aquatic supporters have clarified their thoughts on “fun and swimming lessons.”

McDowell Mountain Aquatic Center is only 18 minutes from town. Is the extra 8 minutes too long for the people who want it to drive?

Recreation Management magazine article says, “a lot of taxpayers are starting to rebel they’re looking at recreation departments with pools and wondering why it costs so much.” In any given community the percentage of people who use the pool is “small” and non-users are demanding more accountability.

In most municipalities the community pool loses several hundred thousand dollars a year.

From coast to coast severe budget shortfalls are forcing aquatic facilities to pay closer attention to the bottom line, or in dire cases to cease operating altogether. Many cities with multiple pools have closed some or all of them. Countless other cities have cut hours of operation, closed on holidays or shortened the season. Raleigh, N.C. being one of them. Glen Hall pool in Sacramento, Calif. was slated to be closed this summer for recreational swimming due to budget cuts. Utilities, insurance and staffing top of the list of operational expenses.

The school budget has no extra money in it to support their center yearly. Why would they squander their only rainy day funds, our land assets?

We are listening to all of the above. Are you, Mr. Schweers?