Hi - :I have major problems with this deal to sign off operation of our
brand-new swimming pool to a private club - especially one that is the
sole bidder and has made no clear statement of exactly how much public
use will be allowed. I don't get why Menlo Park justifies this by saying
it is losing $500K on the pool each year. I think this is mainly because
they are including the operating costs of the Belle Haven pool, and they
would have to spend that money anyhow regardless of who runs the Burgess
Park pool. Many cities are providing very little subsidy to their pool
(for example Palo Alto, Campbell, Cupertino). I don't think Menlo Park
would lose much by running the Burgess Park pool itself, especially
since it is a brand-new pool. Many more people will be using it,
especially since there are two pools. For example, one reason my husband
and I go often to Palo Alto is that there is both a lap pool where the
adults/older kids can swim at the same time younger kids can do rec
swim. Now that Menlo Park will have the same, we will go to the Menlo
Park pool. Also, Menlo Park would make a lot of money if it would charge
Team Sheeper fees to use the pool. I'd really like to see the actual
numbers that Menlo Park uses to justify their $500,000 pool subsidy
statement. How much is Burgess? How much is Belle Haven, for example?
Where can I get these numbers?

BY the way, is there some reason that the critical Planning Commission
meeting about Team Sheeper is scheduled during the Menlo Park School
District spring break? Is this to make it difficult for parents in Menlo
Park - many of whom are very very considered about this issue since it
concerns our community swimming pool - to attend? I would definitely be
at the meeting on April 10th if I wasn't going out of town with my kids
for the spring break.

Thanks, Mary Teruel (homeowner, 570 Laurel Street, Menlo Park)

 
Received on Fri Apr 7 20:02:16 2006