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

Letters to the Editor — May 27, 2020

Heartening to see lunch giveaway I feel fortunate to live in Sequim… Continue reading

Letters to the editor — May 20, 2020

Predictions fair poorly How can pundits be so spectacularly wrong in their… Continue reading

Letters to the editor — May 6, 2020

Local nonprofit hurt by funding policy While Payroll Protection Plan relaunched this… Continue reading

Letters to the editor — April 29, 2020

Don’t stop now During this critical time for our community with the… Continue reading

Letters to the editor — April 22, 2020

Consider alternative to roundabout In the April 15 edition of the Sequim… Continue reading

Letters to the Editor — April 15, 2020

Roundabout isn’t solution for intersection An April 8 Sequim Gazette article states… Continue reading

Letters to the Editor – March 25, 2020

For our safety’s sake, limit visits to peninsula I live on the… Continue reading

Letters to the editor — March 18, 2020

Time to ‘buck up’ Who came up with COVID-19? It originated in… Continue reading

Letters to the editor — March 4, 2020

Kudos to Crecelius I recently read your article about Eric Crecelius retiring… Continue reading

Letters to the editor — Feb. 26, 2020

Thanks for the holiday cheer A quick thank you to the City… Continue reading

Letters to the editor — Feb. 12, 2020

Reconsider location for MAT facility When I first moved to Sequim in… Continue reading

Letters to the editor — Feb. 5, 2020

Clinic suggestion is ‘absurd and silly’ Robert Falk’s “Move the Mat?” (Letters… Continue reading