Ms. Goodrich
Thank you for your comments, I will share them with the R&P board. My staff
have already talked to Fairfax County an discovered the situation that you
described. Last week ,I met with the Revenue Authority and will continue to
explore options available to us to have an aquatic facility in Howard County.

Gary Arthur

>>> <RGoodri973@...> 12/15/08 11:22 PM >>>
Dear Mr. Ulman:

A year ago at your first Citizens' Budget Meeting (Dec. 2007), I was the
lone voice who made a pitch for a 50-meter indoor pool in Howard County, based
on observation of need and heavy aquatics use in our county.

So much has changed since that day: more voices added to mine; a new aquat
ic feasibility study; the economic climate.

So much has stayed the same: my support for a 50-meter indoor pool; still no
formal plans to move forward on a public aquatics facility.

I'd like to thank you, Mr. Arthur, and the Department of Recreation and
Parks for listening to me and other aquatics advocates, and for formalizing the
focus on public aquatics by commissioning the feasibility study. Furthermore,
I'd like to thank Mr. Arthur and the RAP Advisory Board for acknowledging
that a "need" for public aquatics exists -- as well as for publicly stating
their willingness to partner to the Columbia Association and the Revenue
Authority to explore the idea of bringing such a project to fruition. These
are
steps in the right direction.

However, there is one issue in the feasibility study that I'd like to
address -- that of the Opinion of Revenue for 50-meter pools. As I told Mr.
Arthur
and the RAP Advisory Board in November, I did my own research with
surrounding counties on their 50-meter pools -- particularly with regard to
revenue-generation and program usage (such as # of program days for swim meet
rentals,
among other metrics) and found that the report grossly understated the
revenue potential of such pools. I'd be happy to share my findings in detail,
as
well as my sources (names, titles and contact info) from surrounding
counties. Based on this I suggested that the Recreation and Parks' staff do
their
own research and talk directly to the staffers I spoke to, to get a more
accurate portrayal of revenue potential of these types of pools. This is
important
so that we do not prematurely rule out the potential of a 50-meter pool.

The aquatics director in Fairfax County said that the model facility that
best suits 50-meter pools is one that offers multiple amenities, such a
golfing, racquetball, exercise rooms, and meeting rooms. The county's aquatic
consultant agreed with this , and they suggested locating a pool nearby another
recreational facility.

I refer to this as the public "country club" model. Fairfax County's most
successful and profitable 50-meter pool (Oak Marr) adjoins a golf complex and
in addition to the 50-meter pool it also offers a sauna, spa, fitness rooms,
spin studio, racquetball courts, and meeting rooms.

Imagine partnering with the Columbia Association to bring higher utilization
to one of their golf courses or other amenities by partnering with them to
redevelop underutilized land -- creating local "destinations" for county
residents and beyond -- all the while helping CA to maintain their many
properties.

I can't think of a better way to stimulate the local economy than by
modernizing health and fitness destinations and bringing them up 21st century
standards! I think it's commendable that RAP and CA are both willing to
discuss
partnership arrangements, given that each entity has resources (i.e., customer
base/growth potential; land) that the other entity lacks. It could be a
true win/win.

Imagine all the other partnerships that can be fostered to turn such a
vision into a reality -- bringing aboard the Revenue Authority, HCPSS, the
Health
Department, the Office of Aging, and HCC. Something for everyone -- aquatics
fitness, health, therapy, competition, education. Something that we all can
share. The long term benefits to the citizenry far outweigh the short term
costs. An investment in the citizenry.

With this in mind, I think your administration should make it a priority to
show a tangible sign of support for such a project -- even if symbolic. I
respectfully request that you consider adding a token amount of seed money to
the FY10 Capital Budget to signify a small step toward this goal: perhaps
$500,000 to start demolition or site preparation for redeveloping a parcel of
land. And not to intrude upon any existing -- and worthwhile -- program, but
if it eventually turns out that the Healthy Howard access program monies
need redirecting (Baltimore Sun article 12-11-08), then by all means redirect
them toward the FY10 budget seed monies for a public Rec Center/50-meter pool!
And the monies would even remain under the Healthy Howard umbrella, so they
wouldn't be straying too far!

Thank you for the opportunity to share my views, and for considering public
sentiment in support of aquatics (and particularly, for a 50-meter indoor
pool) in Howard County.

Regards,

Diane Goodridge
8525 High Timber Ct.
Ellicott City, MD 21043


**************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and
favorite sites in one place. Try it now.
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000010)