Some perspectives on SARC clarified

A rebuttal to Mr. Howerter’s letter, “Taxpayers should not subsidize SARC” (Letters to the Editor, Sequim Gazette, July 30, page A-10)

A rebuttal to Mr. Howerter’s letter, “Taxpayers should not subsidize SARC” (Letters to the Editor, Sequim Gazette, July 30, page A-10): “ … special interest group claiming they deserve a subsidy from the population at large.” Sequim Aquatic Recreation Center was formed for and by that “population at large.” Bowling alleys, movie theaters and restaurants that go out of business are private enterprises and therefore not subsidized with public funds, as Mr. Howerter implies.

Question of demonstration: Mr. Howerter wrote, “A facility used by only a minority of the community should ‘pay its own way.’” Does that include the library, fire department and OMC?

Mr. Howerter goes on, “SARC should be required to operate by the same (company) standard.” Distinction: Private businesses provide the ability to gain personal wealth. SARC is a taxing entity formed to provide monetary support for the population at large swimming pool!

“Operating standards”: SARC is governed by state statutes and held to a higher financial and legal standard than most private citizens.

Mr. Howerter’s last comment was, “If SARC can’t remain solvent without taxpayer’s subsidy, it should close and sell its facilities to a private company.” To be sold, Sequim would have to be four times its present population to be profitable for a national franchiser to acquire.

Most importantly and often forgotten, Sequim Aquatic Recreation Center was known, as are 99 percent of all other public swimming pools, not to be self-supporting. That was true in 1985 and remains true to this day.

If more people had attended SARC’s seminar on July 23, maybe the population at large would better understand the difference between Business and Government!

Jan Richardson

Sequim

(Richardson is a SARC board member.)

 

More in Letters to the Editor

Developer looks to bring 103 homes to Brownfield Road

Plans are tentatively coming before City of Sequim officials to consider a… Continue reading

Letters to the Editor — Feb. 2, 2017

SEF board supports school levies The Sequim Education Foundation supports both of… Continue reading

Letters to the Editor — Sequim Gazette, Jan. 18, 2017

Time to pay it forward for schools, students Let’s face it, we… Continue reading

Letters to the Editor — Sequim Gazette, Dec. 14, 2016

Electoral College has a purpose Regarding John Burbank’s guest opinion article on… Continue reading

Letters to the Editor

Uphold the ban Presently, Clallam County has a ban on roadside spraying.… Continue reading

Letters to the Editor — Sequim Gazette, Nov. 23, 2016

Fourth Estate needs to step up A couple months before election day,… Continue reading

Opinion: Letters to the Editor

Faustian trade fractures family And so I’m talking on the phone to… Continue reading

Letters to the Editor — Sequim Gazette, Nov. 2, 2016

A vote for Neupert My vote for Superior Court Judge, Position 2,… Continue reading

What about the middle school?

I got my ballot for the upcoming School Bond election today (April 7). As I read about the school bond proposal, I saw one glaring omission in planning for the “large number of future students”: What happens in five years when these students graduate from elementary school and go to middle school?

Letter: Vote for Yacklin

My wife and I have known Kim Yacklin for over 20 years. She is exactly what we need in the Auditor's Office, someone who has a high level of understanding of the operations of the county and someone who has the integrity, professionalism and intelligence to run a department.

Letter: Think Positive

The local population, especially in Sequim, is intelligent, well-educated, mostly financially comfortable and old enough to appreciate the prosperity that used to be.

Are you still trying to decide about the Sequim School Bond issue currently before you?

Are you still trying to decide about the Sequim School Bond issue currently before you?