Letter; Sniping at SARC by private concerns

A local gym operator has taken to Facebook and newspapers expounding how the Sequim Aquatic Recreation Center, a non-for-profit, has an unfair competitive advantage.

Sniping at SARC by private concerns

A local gym operator has taken to Facebook and newspapers expounding how the Sequim Aquatic Recreation Center, a non-for-profit, has an unfair competitive advantage.

First, the community owns SARC … spent $2.4 million to build it in 1985-1986 and sponsored with another $2.5 million in levies until 2004 for community uses, long before any of the local boutique gyms arrived!

A private enterprise choosing to compete with SARC should be able to provide a better full-service community recreation center with comparable prices and take the responsibility of servicing every social economic category. Please, please, if that’s you, step forward … you sponsor kids, elderly, the community, in your private business at less than your operating cost.

ADVERTISEMENT
0 seconds of 0 secondsVolume 0%
Press shift question mark to access a list of keyboard shortcuts
00:00
00:00
00:00
 

SARC is one of the most efficient Park and Recreation Districts in the state, recovering 80 percent of its operating costs through user fees, thus mitigating 80 percent of a tax burden. If, as the local gym owner suggests, SARC not provide classes and workout equipment, and just operates the pool, a levy would be 100 percent, not 20 percent of operating cost!

As for her complaint of a levy, SARC’s public mandate implies that its shortfalls will be serviced by taxes. A 12 cents per $1,000 (assessed valuation) levy — a latte a month — would keep a community icon functioning.

Do you want the Sequim Aquatic Recreation Center to remain a viable community asset? A “Yes” or “No” will do on a future ballot! Until then, I would suggest doing some research into what SARC contributes to your community before making pronouncements.

Jan Richardson

Sequim

(Richardson is a SARC board director.)