.
Feedback

Letter to the Editor: Why I am Voting Yes for the Community and Aquatic Center

Judy Petersen, of Sammamish, responds to a recent Local Voices post by Christie Malchow discussing the pros and cons of the Community/Aquatic Center issue.

Dear Editor,

As a member of the Yes! – Sammamish Community and Aquatic Center committee, I would like to respond to Christie Malchow’s very thoughtful Sammamish Patch article on this issue.  

I am also a Sammamish Parks Commissioner, but these opinions are mine and those of the Yes! Committee and are not intended to represent the Parks Commission as a whole.

Christie Malchow has written a very thoughtful post that raises several questions a lot of people are asking about the proposed Sammamish Community and Aquatic Center.  Like her, I believe that swimming is a critical life skill.  (I currently drive from my home in Sammamish to the Coal Creek Y in order to give my grandchildren an opportunity to learn to swim.)  But unlike her, I have made up my mind on this issue:  My vote will be a resounding “Yes!” 

As a member of the Sammamish Parks Commission, I am acutely aware that numerous polls of our citizens have indicated a strong desire for an aquatic center right in the heart of our city.  We live in a young community and need a family-oriented center, with a pool that allows for all ages and abilities.  Lap pools at local fitness centers are not suitable for young children.  The recreational pool proposed for our community will have a shallow entry, a water slide and other fun features as well as life guards.  And the proposed lap pool will have equipment that allows for handicapped entry. 

I know a lot of us believe there are other, competing uses for these funds.  But more than half of the dollars for this community and aquatic center would come from restricted funds: the Parks and Recreation capital budget.  The City Council moved other parks construction projects forward to beyond 2015, to free up these funds.

Once built, the community and aquatic center will be an asset, owned by the city.  The Y will take on all operating and maintenance expenses, something they have done at all their facilities for more than 140 years.  If the Y were forced to close their doors, it would be a first. They have never been forced to close a facility in a young and thriving community such as ours.  And because the Y is nonprofit, it raises funds through donations and grants, allowing membership fees to remain low. 

By the time we build this facility – if we build it – my grandchildren will be well beyond swimming lesson age.  But in a community with so many young families, I would like to ensure that every child has an opportunity to learn to swim.  It is a critical skill.  And that is why I am donating my time to the “Yes!” campaign and that is why I will vote “Yes!” on Proposition 1.

Judy Petersen

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Sammamish-Issaquah Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Sorting through clothing at the warehouse
Jeanne Gustafson (Editor) May 17, 2013 at 01:54 pm
Thank you so much for sharing this great event on Patch! What a cool thing to do--as an IssaquahRead More resident, I really appreciate your involvement with EBC.
Photo by Jean Johnson
Margaret Santjer (Editor) May 16, 2013 at 12:17 pm
Thanks for posting that, Jean! I love this time of year when the markets open. Were there a lot ofRead More people for the opening day?
David V May 15, 2013 at 02:49 pm
Thx Kendall, bear news just isn't what it used to be. thinking it has something to do with the komoRead More anchor moving out of our trossachs neighborhood:)
Kendall Watson (Editor) May 15, 2013 at 01:19 pm
Hey, thanks for the bear photos on Friday! Sorry about the slight delay in posting!
Ben H April 14, 2013 at 03:42 am
Agreed Mark, Much as this solution seems crazy, some things are worth paying for (law and order, aRead More decent safety net, good schools and yes roads). I do blame the tax hawks though. Washington already has a relatively regressive tax structure. The "choke the government" solution seems carried way too far.
Question Mark April 12, 2013 at 02:13 pm
I thank the author for his well thought out arguments regarding these important transportationRead More issues in Washington state. While I believe some of the ideas presented are debatable, for example I believe that a vital and well used transit system ought to be part of our congestion relief plan in metropolitan areas, the lack of realistic funding options for this system cannot be ignored. However, our legislature (both parties included) seems to place a higher priority on "no new taxes" than creating a sustainable future for the state in many areas, including the transportation system. More than that, though, we live in a state whose citizens have varied interests and priorities. Most of all, we need our government to set priorities so that citizen interests and needs can be reasonably served. It seems we are pretending that we can base tax policies and tax rates exclusively on individual self-interest, as is often the consequence "no new taxes" scheme (e.g. if I don't get a direct benefit for myself, I won't support paying for it). This seems to me to be as much a part of this problem as current transportation system priorities.
Richard Bray April 9, 2013 at 07:26 pm
It gets worse folks. I was part of a selected focus group a few weeks ago of people who live alongRead More I-405 conducted by a well-known marketing research firm and paid for by WSDOT. They are considering options that would charge commuters to use a new lane on I-405 & charge for the existing carpool lane too (even if you have two people in the car!)