FOTP Facebook posts

[pasayten]

Evidently they let some folks comment... Certainly not any of the "Against" group on this BB that they know of.

Friends of the Pool - Twisp 10/14/2023

YES ON PROP 1, YES to a POOL!
A VOTE YES: Provides Sustainable Funding through a Levy.
The Methow Aquatics District will have the ability to finance operations, solicit grants, and assure private donations will be well managed.

Lucina Wilson
Prop 1, if passed will take much needed money out of the pockets of low income families, senior citizens and families trying to establish a foothold in the valley. The spirit of the Methow has always been to give what you can and not take from those who can't afford it.
Projects such as the Wagner Memorial Pool, MT trail system, the ice rink, the Big Valley ranch and many other conservancy projects were all completed and funded through that Methow spirit of giving by donating money, labor and time. So why not continue with that Methow spirit for a new or rehabed pool?
As a united community we can do anything.

[spaceship]

FOP continues to weaponize children and use them as pawns to elicit an emotional response in lieu of providing a factual argument for spending 23 million dollars plus for a claimed basic human right to learn to swim !
Most of us want a pool , but shrouding their desire in a fog of misguided propaganda is a shot below the belt and is frankly harmful , and POOR FORM ! We all want what’s best for the children ! Mine is not passing this financial burden in perpetuity to them !
STOP YOUR DOING THEM MORE HARM THAN GOOD !!!
Peter larsen

[Fun CH]

October 12th post... A little confusing as a vote on Prop 1 is not actually to approve a "levy" to create a recreation district. Campaign Manager? Should know more facts about Prop 1 and RCW 35.61 Metropolitan Park Districts. We all want a pool... Just build one without an MPD... There are plenty of other options.

Friends of the Pool - Twisp

The Wagner pool, as some of you may not know, has a very tragic story of beginnings. The story of the loss of a child due to drowning. I’ve asked myself many times this last year, why is safe swimming important to me… As a former ER nurse, I have bore witness to, and tried to save, more than one child drowning victim. I am still haunted by the cries of their parents. I’m not asking you to approve this levy to build an indoor pool, I’m asking you to approve this levy to create a recreation district that will ensure what I consider a basic human right. The right to learn to safely swim in water. When you decide to vote in November, please don’t just think about yourselves and your children (who may now know how to safely swim), think about the future children and families of the Methow Valley. You can help to protect their lives and prevent tragedies by ensuring public access to safe, monitored swimming.

Kellie Zahn
Campaign Manager for Proposition 1

I'm sharing a picture of my autistic kiddo learning to swim in our community pool. Please be kind with your comments and remember that we are your community members, your friends, and we are parents trying to protect the children and citizens of the Methow Valley.

If we didn't have any swimming options in the Methow (Which we always will), there is still a pool in Omak where children can learn to swim. Seniors have to drive to Omak for specialized medical care, like a colonoscopy, so why would it be so hard for parents to drive children to Omak to learn how to swim?

Im saying, I don't buy the argument that we need a 21 million dollar pool ( not including 5 milloin for the land) that operates at a $500,000 per year deficit to save children from drowning. Teaching a child how to swim is the parents responsibility.



https://www.stopdrowningnow.org/drownin ... es%201%2D4.


"Twenty-three percent of child drownings happen during a family gathering near a pool."

"Children younger than one-year-old are more likely to drown at home."

"Eighty-seven percent of drowning fatalities happen in home pools or hot tubs for children younger than 5. Most take place in pools owned by family or friends."

"Thankfully, adults can play a crucial role in protecting the children they love from drowning."

"Close supervision is required when kids are in or near water (including bathtubs), at all times. Drowning happens quickly and quietly, so adults watching kids in or near water should avoid distracting activities like playing cards, reading books, talking on the phone and using alcohol or drugs."


https://www.a3performance.com/blogs/a3- ... an%20drown.



"SO, WHY DO GOOD SWIMMERS DROWN?
Swimmers can drown because they areoverconfident in their abilities

Strong swimmers are less likely to be supervised, which increases their chances of drowning

Experienced swimmers are more likely to take risks when involved in water-based activities

Open water also poses a variety of dangers that often lead to drowning
Specific drowning reasons in the above categories – read below to find out more "

I should add that my closest. encounters with drowning happened while trying to jump a wave on my windsurfer when it was blowing 55mph in the Columbia Gorge.

I jumped on a day when I should not have been jumping waves. As I was jumping the sail back winded and the Mast hit me on the head hard enough to see flashing stars. I passed out for just a moment and landed in the water.

What saved my life was; I wore a helmet with a full face guard similar to a football helmet. I also wore a flotation vest which allowed me to swim back to my board, which was quickly getting further away, in a stargazing dazed state of mind.

Prior to that I fell off a concrete Bulkhead into the water when I was 3 years old. That might be my oldest memory of looking up and seeing a hand reaching towards me and pulling me up out of the water. I fell in the water right next to a guy in a rowboat, but my parents were right there so they would have been able to pull me out of the water if the boat man hadn't done that first.

In both cases I had the proper safety backup.

[pasayten]

October 12th post... A little confusing as a vote on Prop 1 is not actually to approve a "levy" to create a recreation district. Campaign Manager? Should know more facts about Prop 1 and RCW 35.61 Metropolitan Park Districts. We all want a pool... Just build one without an MPD... There are plenty of other options.

Friends of the Pool - Twisp

The Wagner pool, as some of you may not know, has a very tragic story of beginnings. The story of the loss of a child due to drowning. I’ve asked myself many times this last year, why is safe swimming important to me… As a former ER nurse, I have bore witness to, and tried to save, more than one child drowning victim. I am still haunted by the cries of their parents. I’m not asking you to approve this levy to build an indoor pool, I’m asking you to approve this levy to create a recreation district that will ensure what I consider a basic human right. The right to learn to safely swim in water. When you decide to vote in November, please don’t just think about yourselves and your children (who may now know how to safely swim), think about the future children and families of the Methow Valley. You can help to protect their lives and prevent tragedies by ensuring public access to safe, monitored swimming.

Kellie Zahn
Campaign Manager for Proposition 1

I'm sharing a picture of my autistic kiddo learning to swim in our community pool. Please be kind with your comments and remember that we are your community members, your friends, and we are parents trying to protect the children and citizens of the Methow Valley.

[PAL]

Notice the word "deterring" is used, when they really meant to use the word, determining.

[Fun CH]

In reality, probably not to many undecided voters looking at the false narratives on their facebook page...

I guess the hope is that as that facts come out people who thought prop 1 was a good idea will vote no.

Facts like the 20 million plus land costs Mega Mac (one parcel they're looking at costs $5 million) is still stated as on the FOP as the preferred choice and the FOP claim is that the Mega Mac is supported by the community.

Quote from current FOP website.

"Based on community and expert input gathered from 2019-2022, an indoor, year-round facility with two pools of different temperatures, was selected for the current working plan."

"There is strong public support for a year-round, indoor pool that would accommodate athletes, young children, and our aging population"

This quote below from the FOP FB post suggests that the community will decide. But the FOP has already stated that the community wants the Mega Mac. Before they took down the first wording of their web page, they said it had "overwhelming" support from the community.

"The Methow Aquatics District is a critical first step in the process. It will lead the community in deterring the final design, size, phasing and costs of a future pool."

By law, only the 5 appointed Metropolitan Park District board Commissioners make the decision, not the community.

[pasayten]

In reality, probably not to many undecided voters looking at the false narratives on their facebook page...

[PAL]

YES ON PROP 1, YES to a POOL!
A VOTE YES: Does NOT Mean a Go-Ahead to Build.
The Methow Aquatics District is a critical first step in the process. It will lead the community in deterring the final design, size, phasing and costs of a future pool.

Note the word I made obvious by using Bold.

[pasayten]

[pasayten]

Yes!!! Erin is correct... Appointed Board and an MPD... The Methow Aquatics District certainly does not put decision making in the "Public Arena". That statement is a direct falsehood.

I would question this statement based on these facts...

1. Under RCW 35.61 for the creation of a Metropolitan Park District (MPD), the selected governing Board model chosen was appointed, not elected.

2. Any future "citizens advisory committee" would be advisory only. Under RCW 35.61, the Board is not bound to follow their advice.

3. Under RCW 35.61, no further voter input is required for the Boards decision making process as to what location, type, or size of facilities they decide to build.

This is the type of distributed misinformation by FOTP to the voters that concerns me. The lack of required future voter input for a MPD really does limit and cloud the potential for true public participation.

[PAL]

Erin Bosco
How so? A board selected by the town councils and a county commissioner with only 1 at large position making decisions for thousands of homeowners? There will be NO PUBLIC votes on how public tax dollars will be spent or the amount a levy rate will be. This whole proposal is ridiculous.
Reply
1h
Edited
Lucina Wilson
Isn't it a fact that according to Wa. State Law ( RCW 35.61.120) that all decisions for any and all recreational facilities are decided soley by the 5 appointed Metropolitan Park District board commissioners that Friends of the Pool seeks to create with Proposition 1?
Reply
1h

[PAL]

Hey, don't cha know this is old news? Now there is new news, somewhere. Yes, respectful letters to the editor regardless of Don's editorial. Stick to the facts, the facts we have read. The facts that are still out there. If these are the wrong facts, they should get rid of them instead of making us look like we don't know what we are talking about. Of course we do know.
Yes, Steve, thanks for reminding me it is a small number of people that view those posts. So I don't need to get so cranked. But it's makin' me cranky.

[Fun CH]

I encourage people to write letters to the editor. Be respectful. Have your facts correct. Point out statements from past MVNews stories. Quote from the pool feasibility study.

I just wish the editor of that paper would follow your advise. His last editorial read like a Twitter troll. Don't take the bait. Trolls in general are looking for emotional responses, but facts carry more weight.

I wonder if Don Nelson realizes that opposition to a Metropolitan Park District here has bipartisan support.

I see it as a good thing that people who lean left or right both agree that a Metropolitan Park District in a small rural area is not fiscally responsible.

I have talked to Justin, and he is not the one posting on the facebook page... It is another person of the FOTP... I wonder who??? They sure like to post FALSE information. They have also banned me from their facebook page, but I have other ways of accessing it...

Isn't that Justin's voice on those two misinformation videos on their FB page?

I was banned also from commenting on their Facebook page but they left their replies to my comments up.

I agree with Steve that we should post facts. Like the fact that the 20+ million dollar pool plan is still their preferred option and was the plan that was submitted to the Okanagan County Commissioners.

Here is that plan obtained from the county by a public documents request.

Tap on the capture and it will become clear to read.

[SOulman]

The facebook page in question reaches a limited audience, mainly of people who like or follow the page. The posts being discussed here largely prop up the base supporters.

I encourage people to write letters to the editor. Be respectful. Have your facts correct. Point out statements from past MVNews stories. Quote from the pool feasibility study.

Throw some money Ray's way to support advertisements in the paper or yard signs.

Steve Oulman

[PAL]

Maybe he can talk to them and get them to stop these kinds of uninformative posts. Of course, the more they do the worse they look.
We know it's a male's voice, unless they used AI to disguise it as a woman's voice!

[pasayten]

I have talked to Justin, and he is not the one posting on the facebook page... It is another person of the FOTP... I wonder who??? They sure like to post FALSE information. They have also banned me from their facebook page, but I have other ways of accessing it...

[PAL]

This is one of the worst of FOP's post. How do they think we came up with the $21 million price tag? From their own posts on FB, from the FAQ page that they have, from the Draft Interlocal agreement the county drew up, Milligan's presentation and this Methow Valley News article as follows:

https://methowvalleynews.com/2022/04/13 ... -memorial/

They are trying to make we who believe there should be no MPD or taxation of property owners, look bad. They are actually approaching the commiting libel.
Insulting me and will never get my support for any pool at this rate.
They are only making it worse for themselves. My focus is to let people know what the Prop One is-a tax on property owners. They want us to foot the bill for their extravagance.
How dare they? Really Justin, you all need to quit and make it right.

Methow Valley News article by Ann McCreary April 13, 2022

A consultant’s proposed alternatives for replacing the Wagner Memorial Pool include two indoor facility options, which were favored in public feedback.

Community responds to consultant’s proposals

When consultants presented alternatives for a new swimming pool in the Methow Valley to community members at a recent meeting, the community’s response was loud and clear.

“We clearly hear indoor pool,” said Ken Ballard of Ballard*King Associates, the consultant leading a feasibility study for a new pool in the Methow Valley. The new facility would replace the aging Wagner Memorial Pool in Twisp.

In the online public forum in late March, three alternatives for a new pool facility developed by consultants were presented for consideration. About 40 people attended the Zoom presentation hosted by Friends of the Pool, which is spearheading a campaign to replace the swimming pool in Twisp that is only open in summer and is in frequent need of repairs.

Alternative A proposed an outdoor, seasonal facility with a six-lane, 25-yard competitive swimming pool and an attached recreational swimming area. Consultants said that facility could be enclosed in the future.

Alternative B included the same-sized competitive pool and recreational swimming area in an enclosed building for year-round use. Alternative C included the same-sized competitive pool, with a larger recreational pool and the addition of a therapy pool in an enclosed building. Among the people attending and commenting at the Zoom meeting, no one expressed support for the outdoor pool option.

“It’s becoming clearly apparent that people want indoor water,” said Ballard. With that feedback, the consultants will work on refining plans for an indoor swimming pool facility, identifying where it might be located in the valley, and developing options for funding it, he said.

Friends of the Pool will provide further community input to help the consultants in their work, said board member Bo Thrasher.

“Our next steps are to meet with our stakeholders and discuss the comments and preferences we received from our Zoom meeting. We will also be working on a site, and will be pursuing different options that we have in that area. We will also be discussing the possibility of a parks and recreation district in some fashion to help support this pool,” Thrasher said.

Higher costs

The two indoor pool alternatives that were preferred by people attending the online forum each provide for a six-lane, 25-yard competitive pool, with recreational swimming areas attached. Alternative B alternative included a 3,000-square-foot recreational pool attached to the competitive pool. Alternative C included a 4,500-square-foot recreational pool attached to the competitive pool, as well as a separate 3,000-square-foot pool that would have warmer water for therapeutic use.

The cost of building and operating an indoor pool would be significantly higher than an outdoor pool that is open only during a few months in summer, Ballard said.

“When you go from outdoor seasonal to indoor year-round, the costs go up dramatically,” he said. Estimates for the indoor pools were based on 50 weeks a year of operations, Ballard said.

Consultants developed preliminary cost estimates that include annual operating costs such as heating and cooling the buildings and staffing costs, including lifeguards. Pool facilities generally operate at a deficit, and the cost estimates calculate the revenue versus the shortfall in operating costs, Ballard said.

The outdoor, seasonal pool option (Alternative A) was projected to have a capital cost range of $6.8 million to $11.8 million. The annual operational shortfall was projected to be $75,000-$125,000.

Consultants projected the less-expensive indoor pool option (Alternative B) to have a capital cost range of $9.8 million to $18.4 million.” The annual operational shortfall would be $550,000-$625,000.

The larger, more-expensive indoor pool alternative (Alternative C) was projected to have capital costs ranging from $17.9 million to $24.3 million. The annual operational shortfall would range from $650,000 to $725,000, consultants said.

All of the alternatives include an office and lifeguard room, a multi-purpose or party room, lockers and changing areas, a mechanical room, and storage areas. The projected capital costs would vary for each alternative “depending on customization” such as paved versus gravel parking, landscaping, type of enclosure, and amenities.

The recreational pool could include a variety of amenities such as water slides, lazy rivers and wading pools, consultants said. None of the alternatives included “dry side amenities” such as sport courts or gyms.

“The focus of the facility is aquatics-based. The feeling was that needs to be the focus of this phase,” Ballard said. “Obviously the more amenities we have, the price tag goes up.”

Operating challenges

Because pools are finding it increasingly difficult to hire and keep lifeguards, consultants said operating cost projections factor in a pay scale designed to attract and retain guards. “Lifeguarding is now a major issue everywhere in the country,” Ballard said.

The operational costs are based on a preliminary fee structure for pool users that includes day passes of $6 for adults and $4 for children, and annual passes of $300 for adults and $500 for households. “None of that is absolute,” Ballard said.

The capital costs do not include land acquisition, consultants noted. Ray Johnston of Johnston Architects, who is participating in the feasibility study, said development costs such as roads and utilities would be affected by the site. Each of the options would fit on a 2.5-acre site, he said. The Wagner Memorial Pool in Twisp is on about 1.5-2 acres of land, he said.

Identifying a site will be among the next steps in the planning process, and consultants said properties that are “in public ownership already” will be the most desirable to reduce acquisition costs.

A question was posed by a meeting attendee about locating the pool on the Methow Valley School District property between Twisp and Winthrop. Sarah Schrock, Friends of the Pool president, said the location is “inaccessible to people by bicycle or foot” and Friends of the Pool has not “been aggressively pursuing” that option.

Consultants conducted a market analysis of the Methow Valley that identified “opportunities” for developing a pool that included the fact that there is no indoor public pool within 90 miles of the valley; the need to replace the existing pool; and the role of second-home owners and visitors in supporting a pool.

“Constraints” on developing a new pool identified in the market analysis include the valley’s small permanent population; the existence of outdoor pools in other nearby communities; the valley’s lower income and aging population base; and the fact that an aquatics facility will not be able to cover costs of operation.

More analysis

Ballard said the consultants are about halfway through the feasibility study process, and will be analyzing options for capital development and operating costs as the process goes forward.

Ballard*King consultants are working with a ECONorthwest, a finance, policy and planning firm, to evaluate the feasibility of establishing a special recreation district — based on the Methow Valley School District boundaries — that would have the ability to bond to build a facility, and to levy property taxes to support its operations.

Other income sources, including fundraising and grants, could help finance construction of a new facility, Ballard said. “We will do more work on developing a preferred option … then refine funding options,” he said.

The online presentation is available on the Friends of the Pool website, foptwisp.org, on the Events-Community Meetings” page. A feedback form is also available there and Schrock urged people to complete and submit it.

Friends of the Pool was formed in 2005 to support the Wagner Memorial Pool, which is owned and operated by the Town of Twisp, but is used by residents from throughout the Methow Valley and visitors. Over the years the nonprofit group has raised and given more than $400,000 for pool repairs and operating expenses.

After a pool engineering firm determined that it would cost more to repair the 55-year-old pool than it would to replace it, Friends of the Pool began hosting meetings in 2020 with valley residents to explore ideas for a new pool.

A gift from an anonymous fund of the Philadelphia Foundation, which supports community-based philanthropic causes, enabled Friends of the Pool to hire Ballard*King, a Colorado-based recreation consulting and planning firm, last year to conduct the feasibility study on building and funding a new swimming pool facility.

[pasayten]

FOTP's facebook post for 09/30...

[pasayten]

FOTP's facebook post for 10/05...

[pasayten]

FOTP's most recent facebook post for 10/08...

Post is FALSE information... You do not need a Metropolitan Park District to keep a pool in the Methow Valley.

Vote NO on Proposition 1.