------=_NextPart_000_0004_01BD57B3.D21CB0A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I was a member of the finance sub-committee of the Swimming Pool Design
Committee. We were given the job of finding the best method of financing
and hopefully one that would be acceptable to voters and taxpayers. At
first, we questioned the "outdoor" decision ( I started out as an indoor
advocate, too), but after reviewing all the options, numbers and comparable
facilities, it was obvious that the outdoor leisure pool proposed would have
the BEST chance of receiving voter approval, not only from a recreation
aspect, but from a 'cost acceptable to taxpayers' aspect. Yes, the design
is a compromise, but it is the best compromise.
The concern I have is that the pool bond must pass by a 2/3 majority vote.
It is extremely difficult to get a 2/3 majority on ANY bond without a
strong, unified effort. We must get two YES votes for every one NO vote and
20% always vote NO. If the community continues to be divided and express
negative feelings toward the project, it will fail and Moscow will have NO
POOL. Moscow has been without a pool for one year. If we micro-manage and
trash the Committee's hard work and start all over, we are looking at years
before another plan can be implemented. It would be hard to find another
pool committee that will work as hard as this one. It will also be hard to
find another Mr.. Hamilton with $325,000. Our very best chance is NOW.
Please contact a pool committee member with your questions. I think you
will find they did their homework and represented the overall community very
well.
A strong grass-roots effort to get the bond approved will give us a pool in
1999. Negativism and failure of the bond will give us NOTHING for many
years.
B. J. Swanson
bjswan@moscow.com
208-882-0809
------=_NextPart_000_0004_01BD57B3.D21CB0A0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">