Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Tonight's pool resolution

At the suggestion of Councilman Slocum, I present tonight's pool resolution:Did anyone see the discussion tonight?

This is a fiasco. And what perplexed me was when someone suggested to me that my vote was irresponsible.

No. My vote was not irresponsible. My vote was quite responsible.

What's irresponsible is the foot dragging we've seen for years.

Here's a brief history about the pool RFP and the related footdragging. I wrote it in May of this year.

Tim White


Anonymous said...

I didn't get chance to see it, who thought your vote was irresponsible?
You seem to be the only one who sees the problem here.
At what point can the town residents stop this ridiculous mis-use of funds??
I guess it will have to be in November.
Lets hope the Republicans will use these kind of votes to show the rest of the town how the majority is wasting our money.

Anonymous said...

The RJ quoted Mr Altieri speaking about fixing the mold problem as saying whether we put a new bubble or an alternative on it, that has to be addressed, it's not throwing good money after bad.

Not everyone out here in tax payer land can be as bright as the likes of the democrat majority. Maybe they are really good with figures and phrases but as with most real things in the real world the devil is in the physical details.

Face it, the pool ran for how many years with an unobservable mold problem?

Now, the town is actually reviewing proposals for gutting the idiot level bubble design and finally replacing it with something which will function long term. Maybe because we are discussing town government, thinking we are only maybe 12 to 18 months from ground breaking for a new and adequate structure is asking too much. In the real world at this point construction start would be pretty darn close.

That being said, and connecting the dots, maybe just replacing the existing sheet rock with the waterproof version and temporarily patching roof leaks and maybe reducing air recirculation a bit and increasing outside make up air would have gotten the existing structure back up and running for awhile problem free. A permanent fix could be incorporated into the new future structural work which would make more sense. A little more outside make up air might increase heating costs a bit but when you spend, several hundred thousand a year what's a couple of more bucks anyway.

After all, it's not like the mold showed up in the first week of operation and was then the subject of a cover up for years to come, or was it?

Bill said...

In fairness I did not see the discussion but I've witnessed the mold. The root cause; and that is the most important factor on the matter; is the ability of the bubble to push under pressure the moisture from the pool area into the concrete building. When the problem of pressure from the air volume of the bubble is stopped then the mold problem is stopped. The idea to install waterproof sheetrock and other barriers is a realistic attempt to address the problem. What will happen is the ability of the moisture to penetrate the concrete structure will be slowed down, but not eliminated. This action is a bandaid and is not worth the money. It is an attempt to allow the building to remain open for another year or so.

Anonymous said...

Maybe we can sell the pool to Salem, MA

"Bubble, Bubble, toil and trouble!"

Anonymous said...

My feeling is that most residents will not support the pool. I think they don't feel like stake holders, only money providers.

I went to the pool a couple of times this summer and was surprised to find so few people using the pool at any one time. From 10 Am to 4 pm, I counted no more than 65 to 70 people, and one of the days was Saturday with a birthday party. I don't think that many people use it. I think if you subtracted the people for special events or swim practice one would be surprised by the low daily numbers.

I remember when I was growing up we had a town pool and it was free and always crowded with kids.

I remember when they had dollar days at the Cheshire pool and there were lots of families with their kids.

Admission costs are one reason for low attendance, but there are 3 other reasons that I can think of.

1. In an attempt to make more money bithdays and swim lessons are offered. When either of these activities are scheduled, other children are not allowed to use the less deep section of the main pool, and pool toys are restricted to bithday party participants. How many times will someone go to the pool only to be told their child can't use the section that is being used for a birthday party or aswim lesson?

2. The pool may be called a community pool, but it is not designed for that use. It was mainly designed for swim events and swim team practice. The largest part of the main pool is deeper than most children are comfortable in and the bulk of the main pool is for lane swimming.

3. The atmoshere around the pool is stark, at best. The tables are old and shabby, and not all of them even have umbrellas for the scorching days.

I think a pool is an important asset to a community, but inorder to get support for large expenditures, you have to work on the above items. I would like to see that every kid in town can go to the pool free, and to be taught to swim just like they are taught baseball or anyother sport. People pay enough in taxes, so let's just drop the ridiculous notion that it should be self sufficient, it never will be.

Let's think about making it more of a true community pool.

Anonymous said...

This may sound like a dumb question, but when the pool lockerrooms were built, didn't they use waterproof sheetrock?

I gutted my bathroom recently and had enough sense to use the waterproof sheetrock.

Just curious!

Tim White said...

12:21 I joined the Council in 2003. The pool passed at referendum in 1996... while I was living overseas. So I have no firsthand knowledge, but...

I've consistently heard stories that at the time it went to referendum, Council members openly spoke of cost-cutting to get a number that would pass at referendum.

I'm uncertain if those rumors are true. But frankly, it wouldn't surprise me at all. I hear similar conversations today about getting numbers below the $350,000 referendum number.

First it was open space. More recently it was the smartboards. I don't agree with that approach.

Anonymous said...

Thus, they were all voted out....
I wonder what we will discover 10 years from now that this council may have cutt corners on.