My information that the pool committee was divided came from the pool
committee, although I understand that the public position of the committee
was to be that they were "unanimous." So, forgive me, but at the very least,
I'm getting double messages from the committee itself.
Secondly, let me say that not only do I not think the committee achieved
consensus, I don't think they achieved a compromise. Half the people
contacted by the pool committee wanted an indoor facility. In what way were
those people's concerns addressed? I was an indoor pool supporter, but
publicly acquiesced to the outdoor pool while suggesting some modifications,
so please don't characterize my comments as coming from someone who wanted
nothing less than 100% of my desires. I started out wanting an indoor 8-lane
50 meter pool and ended up unsuccessfully begging for just four lanes of 50
meters outdoors in addition to the leisure facilities.
Where I think the pool committee made a big leap was in assuming that the
people who said they wanted an indoor facility or a bigger outdoor facility
wouldn't want to pay for it. When Priscilla Salant and others suggest that a
more scientific survey was needed, I think it was in getting this kind of
information: would people pay for what they said they wanted?
I realize after months of hard work the committee has a personal investment
in their recommendation, but repeated suggestions that this means everyone
should just accept the committee's recommendation without question is
unfair. Those of us who responded to the committee's request for input put a
lot of effort into our suggestions, too. When much of that input is
rejected, we feel as hurt as you do when we question your conclusions. I
would respectfully submit that I have spent as much energy on this question
as the pool committee, although not in as formal a manner. I was on the last
pool committee and I have spent the past 11 years heavily involved in
swimming. I have visited a lot of the pools that the committee telephoned.
And as my fellow swim team parents can attest, every time we visited a pool
we talked about how that pool would or wouldn't work in Moscow.Many of us
have been thinking and talking about this new pool for years--not just the
past couple of weeks.
Finally, please don't dismiss criticism as coming from people whose own
"personal desires" weren't met. The UI pool meets my personal needs just
fine. My daughter, who is a competitive swimmer, is graduating and will not
be participating in swimming locally after this year. As it is, she trains
in Pullman. My son does not compete in swimming. I no longer have any little
toddlers who can't stand up in the UI pool or need swim lessons. I don't
have to worry about what my kids are going to do to run off energy in the
winter. My kids will have finished their PE requirement by the time any pool
is built that could include public school swim lessons. But I know what it's
like to have inadequate facilities for competitive swimmers--especially in
the summer. I know what it's like to have toddlers and little kids with a
lot of energy and too little to do in the winter. I've negotiated pool
contracts with UI and I know how much demand there is for that space. I know
what the current options are for PE in the schools. I'd like to think my
experience is valuable and that I can speak for these groups.
No, you can't please everyone, but I think that the needs of more
constituent groups could have been met without necessarily adding to the
cost of the proposed facility. I'd like to think that in the interest of
getting a pool that the community could support, that it was OK to continue
the dialogue even after the pool committee made its recommendation.
Lois Melina
************************
Lois Melina
Editor, "Adopted Child" newsletter
P.O. Box 9362
Moscow ID 83843
phone: (208)882-1794
fax: (208)883-8035
Lmelina@moscow.com
www.raisingadoptedchildren.com