To the editor:

I have read with interest in your paper about the plans for a $15.2 million so called (1) “public pool”; or (2) “recreation and aquatic center”; or (3) “pool and rec center”; or (4) “outside six-lane lap pool, an indoor leisure pool with a water slide, changing rooms, a hot tub, two multi-purpose rooms for parties, plus offices, a small kitchen, a climbing wall, and a fitness center.” Well, now, I understand Number 1 fairly well, but then I somehow become muddled. By the time I get to Number 4, I am cross-eyed and sinking fast. Are we building a swimming pool or a docked cruise ship?

Yes, I believe we should have a public swimming pool on South Whidbey. But with the current state of the economy and the uncertainty of the future, perhaps we should reevaluate and prioritize. Could a family of four who is having a tough time buying groceries, etc., afford to send their kids swimming two or three days a week during the summer?

May I ask what the rush is to get this on the November ballot? If Number 4 passes, may I bid for the insurance?

An afterthought: Perhaps a good-sized indoor pool with lap lanes plus a shallow end for kids would suffice for now.

M. L. Griswold

Freeland