by Grand Forks Herald
July 31, 2012 at 12:22 pm in Grand Forks Herald
East Grand Forks Mayor Lynn Stauss on Tuesday vetoed the City Council’s action a week earlier to accept a $1.5 million bid to renovate the city’s swimming pool.
Tags: city government, GF and EGF, lynn stauss, pool, updates 15 Comments »
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
build a indoor and co op with the schools and promote swim, health and fitness thru out the town…takeit and grow or close like the rest of your town
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: 19 31
Too many years without a helmet, harley. I wonder why nobody don’t like you.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: 11 26
Harley, maybe you’re not from EGF and don’t know that the school has even less money than the city. The school board cannot vote to raise taxes. If the school needs money, there has to be a referendum. I don’t think the school board is going to try to get people to vote for an indoor pool when we are cutting other programs. Or maybe you have millions to promote health and fitness. You could have the naming rights;)
Like or Dislike: 8 3
I applaud Mayor Stauss for standing up against higher taxation!
Hot debate. What do you think? 25 21
Yes. That’s a large increase for a facility that’s not useable year-round. There has to be a better option at funding the repairs.
Like or Dislike: 17 8
Warvol, anyone who has been following this knew the veto was coming and SOP supported the veto as long as it got a discussion going about what to do with the pool. This discussion is 15 years past due. Just think of the fund raising that could have been done the last few years had the mayor and council acted earlier. We could’ve had a new pool by now…with NO city funds spent!
Like or Dislike: 15 5
Yeah, the argument to spend 1.5 million on a structure that’s a half century old doesn’t hold water. (pun intended) If building new, craft a mosaic on the bottom and then plead for legacy funding from the State.
Like or Dislike: 5 6
lowrent, just to clarify…the renovation would’ve been a completely new structure with the same footprint as the old pool (new concrete and filtration, etc.). Plus, the shell of the bath house would remain, but it would be gutted. SOP is more than fine with the veto because it opens the discussion for options for the pool. Not many options were even explored before the current renovation was bid.
Like or Dislike: 16 3
I wonder how expensive it would seem if suddenly they found kids swimming in the river if they have to close? There used to be a rope to swing out on behind the dike on the GF side……And a couple other spots along the way. I used to be a good swimmer and swam across it several times just because I knew ti was dangerous and would prove to myself I could handle whatever it threw at me (Young and dumb…..Amazing I made it this long eh?) It can be tricky when the water is flowing good, and without a pool over there you very well could find others deciding to take to the river too…..
Like or Dislike: 12 0
Thank you for clarifying the issue, Melody. Maybe I should research the whole situation before commenting.
Like or Dislike: 6 0
No worries lowrent! Someone will always “clarify” the issues for you on area voices:) Glad you have taken an interest in the EGF pool.
Like or Dislike: 5 3
I look at EGF’s Taj Mahal city hall and wonder why the kids can’t have a new pool….
Like or Dislike: 13 1
The EGF city hall was paid for with money the city received after the flood. As well as the library and the schools. We didn’t see an increase in our property taxes to fund it. The money we received came with restrictions. It had to be used accordingly. We will figure out what to do about the pool. Just give us some time to do so.
Like or Dislike: 5 1
I agree with you to an extent, tj. (I did click “like” btw) Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think the funds that we received after the flood absolutely had to be used to move DeMers Ave. around the city hall so city hall could be built in the middle of what was the road. This was done so it could be seen from the Sorlie Bridge. I’m not an architect or contractor, but I’m pretty sure that cost the city a good chunk of change.
I guess I shouldn’t second guess what has already been done, but I do think city leaders have had monies in the past that could have been used to fund a new pool, but they chose not to. Anyone hear a moo?
Like or Dislike: 12 2
You are right Melody. My memory isn’t as sharp now that so many years have passed. Fifteen years since the flood. That’s almost unbelievable.
Jeff is right as well. Our tax dollars did pay for the Taj Mahal. It was federal money if I remember this right. But it could have been used wiser.
And I would have preferred the street have stayed straight. It was such a pain going around the Holiday Mall parking lot when they blocked Demers. I was shaking my head when they/he decided to stick city hall out so we could see it from the bridge.
Like or Dislike: 10 1
Click here to cancel reply.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
To start connecting please log in first. You can also create an account.
Topics is proudly provided by the Forum Communications Company