wall-of-lies

I think Cameraman Bruce and I figured out why we were not invited as media to see the indoor pool before the public. They didn’t want us to see the ‘Wall of Lies’. I just hope taxpayers didn’t pay for this piece of propaganda.

Besides the fact that this hasn’t been discussed for 60 years, there are many claims on this mural that don’t add up. The first one (which I didn’t take a picture of) is that Nelson Park (Drake Springs) would have been the home of the first indoor pool (if that darn Theresa Stehly didn’t get involved) her name wasn’t mentioned on the article, but it was clear who they were trying to throw under the bus. The outdoor pool passed at that location of an almost 2/1 vote. Though Stehly didn’t know it at the time, it would have actually been a poor location for an indoor pool. An aquatic consultant later told the city that because of ground water issues at Nelson Park, building an indoor pool at that location would have caused major maintenance concerns. In hindsight, we should be thanking Stehly.

speller

The only one recommending the Spellerberg site was the mayor. The voters had no part in that decision. As for the convenient parking, you should have seen the zoo with traffic that was backed up both directions for at least a half a mile on Western Avenue tonight. Where will all these people park when there is a swim meet? Good question. I have often argued that the city should have partnered with Sanford at the Sports Complex for an indoor pool. Plenty of parking and room for expansion. We are literally land locked at Spellerberg, and with the expansion of the VA, expect parking issues for years to come. Eventually the city will have to take out more green space at the park to build a bigger parking lot.

debt-lie

Now let’s move on to the ‘advocational sessions’ and the pack of lies surrounding the outdoor pool vote. The public NEVER voted for an indoor pool, they simply rejected an outdoor pool, as I said, in a campaign paid for by taxpayers that had so many half truths in it, I wouldn’t even know where to begin. But I take issue with the crafty language the city used with the funding, ‘. . . which included no additional City debt,’. While that statement in itself is true, we basically turned a loan over for the levee bonds. When the Feds repaid us for that loan, instead of using the money to pay it off or using it for infrastructure, we turned the debt over to the pool. We still have to pay off those bonds, so this is essentially a white lie. There is still approximately $13 million of unpaid debt.

And lastly, the mayor couldn’t resist to get his name on wall in the building with one of his silly quotes;

ac-mayorquote

And the $1.5 million dollar a year subsidy we have to pay to run this place will warm everyone’s heart.

As I mentioned above, a better option would have been partnering with Sanford or even the school district on this project. If anything, the aquatic center is a failure of prudent vision in acquiring such a facility, and we will all be paying for that mistake for years to come.

5 Thoughts on “Indoor aquatic center ‘Wall of Lies’

  1. Titleist on October 12, 2016 at 8:44 pm said:

    MIDCO indoor PUBLIC pool is awesome!
    Big step forward for SF and the entire region. This will receive heavy use. Great for the kids in the area.
    Great investment in and for the City.
    Too bad that this couldn’t get done for the folks over at Drake Springs.
    Next indoor public pool should have a wave pool too!

  2. The Blogger Formerly Known as "Winston" on October 12, 2016 at 9:05 pm said:

    I noticed a lot of people leaving the Center with brand new sporty MIDCO plastic tote bags…. Now that had to be exciting, right?

    Is there a display case there touching on the history of quitclaim deeds? You would think that that would be appropriate there, especially since its history is 60 years if not greater than that.

    What about the poor kids? Are they going to get to swim there for free, like at the other pools in the summer? If not, why not? I think poor kids know how to swim in the winter, too.

    It seems to me that the best way to get the veterans on our side would be to allow the poor kids to swim for free given our obvious encroachment upon our veteran neighbors’ neighborhood.

    Don’t get me wrong. I am all for the pool. Well, that is if the poor kids get to swim there for free. It is only fair and consistent, isn’t it?… We must not be a “Tale of two cities”…

  3. The D@ily Spin on October 13, 2016 at 10:32 am said:

    A real champion of the people doesn’t have to post his name on everything while in office. A profound leader doesn’t have to quote himself with propaganda on public property. We’ll commend the next mayor whose campaign promise is to remove Huether tagging and stop taking the name of Jesus in vain on snow plows.

  4. Taxpayer on October 13, 2016 at 4:12 pm said:

    I guess when MMM makes up tales like we’ve been talking about this for 60 years…..at least then, he doesn’t have to talk about how a 19.4 million dollar swimming pool ended up costing the taxpayers over 24 million.

Post Navigation