 |
| Photo by Michelle Hopkin
BY AMY DONALDSON, DESERET NEWS
OREM – When the Rich volleyball players remind each other to “Play like Rich” they are honoring a commitment that goes far beyond the hard work invested by this year’s team.
Read the whole story at http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865665989/1A-volleyball-Rich-wins-first-state-title-in-8-years.html
“Really there is more for a championship for Rich than just a trophy,” said junior outside hitter Julia Hopkin after the Rebels won their first 1A title since 2008 with a 27-25, 25-19, 20-25, 25-19 win over defending champion Panguitch Saturday night at UVU’s UCCU Center. “It’s all the players before and everything they did. That’s what we wanted to do, that’s what we wanted to be."
|
Saturday, October 29, 2016
2016 Utah 1A State Volleyball Champs. Congratulations Lady Rebels!!
Garden City Fire Board
Anita Weston, reporter
Rich Civic Times
GARDEN CITY, Utah. October 20, 2016. A copy of the proposed 2017 Budget was passed to the various
board members. They were asked to look
over the information and make any changes they think would be good. The suggestions can be incorporated into the
proposed documents next month and final approval would be made at the December
meeting.
The Fire Department has received $10,000 for the inspection
of short term rentals. The fire chief
recommended that this money be spent on new radios or used in another way that
would enhance the department.
Equipment repairs have increased this past year. The proposed budget shows that more money has
been set aside to handle this expense in the coming year.
The Christmas Party has been scheduled for December 9 at 7
p.m. The budget hearing will be heard
that evening at 6 p.m. prior to the Christmas party. The firemen decided that they would like to
cook the dinner for the party and have it a bit more informal than in the
past. Gifts for the firefighters and
door prizes will need to be obtained by that date.
The town needs to get more hazmat trained firefighters. There are not enough people trained above the
operations level. When there is a
critical hazmat incident, individuals have to be called in from other
areas. We need people to become
technicians. Usually to obtain this
certification, it takes 3 to 4 months.
However, there is an opportunity in Alabama where individuals who are chosen to
attend that program can be given a grant that pays for their expenses including
airfare. They get one week of intensive
training and receive the required certification that is accepted in Utah .
Chief Mike Wahlberg reported that five men including himself have
indicated that they would like to take advantage of this opportunity. The most difficult part for these individuals
is that the individuals will have to take a week off from their regular jobs in
order to attend this training. Chief
Wahlberg noted that because he is paid, he would not ask for any help from the
board. However, he asked that the board
give $500 to each of the other individuals to help them while they are away
from their regular work. He noted that
there is enough money in the budget to handle this request. He noted also that it would make a big
difference to the city and the county to have individuals certified at the
technical level. The board made a motion
and passed it granting $500 to each of those individuals who would be going to Alabama .
Brush truck 43 had starter trouble that has been repaired. Brush
40 had a grinding noise. It was taken to
Logan for
repairs which will cost about $700 - $800.
There have been no purchase requisitions this month.
The fire boat was pulled from the water this past week. It has been covered and is in the parking lot
at the harbor. It will take only five to
ten minutes to get the boat back into the water if it is needed. They have a jump starter pack on board so that
it can be started even in cold weather.
All of the equipment is in good order.
Responses this past month include one small fire, nine fire
alarms, one carbon monoxide, one agency assist, and eight medical incidents.
The Peterson Hollow Fire has a payout that affects us. The fire was a good experience for all of the
firefighters who assisted. Those who
help created a good image for Garden City.
In addition they were equipped and trained as well as any of the
firefighters at the fire. Chief Wahlberg
noted that Garden City may have a small fire department, but the local firefighters
did as well as any at the fire.
The state has a firm set of rules and regulations that they
follow very carefully, and it was interesting to become more familiar with them
and see how they work. The state fire
rules determined that the Garden City Fire Department was to bill the state for
$22,992 for our assistance in that fire. The amount of $8,335 goes for the help
from the local firefighters, and $14,657 is for the use of our equipment. The fire itself cost six-and-a-half to seven
million dollars. The fire burned 1200
acres.
Chief Wahlberg noted that he would like to use the above
funds to enhance the city’s equipment.
He noted that perhaps it would be good to buy a wild-land truck that is
dedicated for deployments. Another
suggestion would be having two equipped four-wheelers or side- by-sides for
emergency responses.
Rich County School Board Meeting
Anita Weston, reporter
Rich Civic Times
RANDOLPH, Utah. October 19, 2016. Expenditures were discussed.
It was noted that the largest payment this last month was for the fire
alarm system that was installed this past year at South Rich schools.
There was one request for permission to home-school a
child. This request was approved.
The winter sports schedules were discussed. In the middle school, there are some Thursday
games. It was noted that the students
will not be leaving school for these games until 3:30 in the afternoon. Approval was granted for the middle school
schedule.
The high school winter sports schedules were also
discussed. A new school, UMA, (Utah Military
Academy ) asked if Rich County Ogden , is similar to a ROTC Program, and
appears to be quite strict. It was
established to educate army family children.
They have a Varsity, Junior Varsity, and a freshman team which would
allow for three games.
The motion as made and passed to accept the high school
schedules.
There is always a turnover in staffing. Mr. Stewart has been over the girls’
program. He has resigned. The board acknowledged their appreciated for
all of the work that he has done and wanted to thank him for his efforts. Coaches give up a lot of time—including many
Saturdays.
Gary McKee has been asked to fill Mr. Stewart’s
position. Superintendent Dale Larsen approved
this suggestion. The motion was made and
passed by the board to accepted McKee to fill this position.
The board approved giving gift certificates for Christmas
this year to school personnel. It was
noted that members of the school board will not be receiving any gift
certificates.
The USBA National Convention will be held in Denver , Colorado
Scott Saby, school board member, noted that attending regional and national meetings
has been most helpful for him. He said
he always learns when he attends them.
UHSAA is working on various brackets for both volleyball and
football. It will be interesting to see
if they will keep or change the current program.
November Board Meeting will be held the third Wednesday,
November 16, in Randolph . Lunch will be available to board members at 11:15
just prior to the high school lunch. The
board meeting will begin at noon. There
will be a work session after from 2:00 p.m.to 3:00 p.m. to work on the
accreditation materials.
It was suggested that the item dealing with the adult
education program possibility be placed on the agenda for next month. Rich County Schools will be working with Morgan School
District Utah ’s
required courses and allow them to get a diploma or sit for the GED exam.
How Federal & State Funds Are Used By Rich Schools
Anita Weston, reporter
Rich Civic Times
RANDOLPH, Utah. October 19, 2016. The Utah Consolidated Association (CDA) Plan was presented
to the School Board. This is a budget
plan of how the district is going to spend federal monies along with some state
monies, making sure that they stay within federal and state requirements and
still meet needs of our local schools.
One of the requirements is that the budget must be presented before the
School Board. The following is just some
of the items mentioned.
The Title 1A money of $51,043 is for salaries for aides in
the South Rich Elementary, since this is where the highest need and lowest
scores were found. It will also be used
for travel for outings, supplies, and administrative help.
Title 2 funds are for professional teacher development and
pays for conference registrations, travel, and lodging, as well as supplies and
materials. Additional monies will go to
early childhood programs and reading achievement. It will also be used for salaries and benefits for full-day kindergarten
teachers. It covers the cost of a
literary specialist. Early intervention
is also included.
State Funds go for school enhancement, tutoring programs,
summer programs, conference registrations, as well as supplies and incentives.
The IDE (Individual Disabilities Education) Act is for
special pre school programs for handicapped individuals. Currently Rich County school needs of K
The motion was made and accepted to approve this use of
these monies. There was one vote in
opposition to the acceptance of this program.
We Need Computer Repair With Chuck Stocking Retiring!
To The Editor:
It is with mixed emotions that I am announcing my retirement from computer repair. When I started Bear Lake Computers over 9 years ago I was new to the area and had a lot more free time than I do these days. Before moving up here to Garden City I lived in Logan and had worked at Computerwise for about 5 years. After we moved here I started to kind of miss the computer world so I decided to get back into it a little. It all started as more of a hobby to give me something more to do.
Over the years it has grown into more of a full time job. My family has been the one to pay the price as it has pulled me away from them. So unfortunately I have decided to discontinue those services in order to have more of a family life and focus on my other business ventures. Thank you Bear Lake for the business you have given me over the years.
Chuck Stocking
Garden City Rec Center Thoughts - Joey Stocking
I've been undecided on how to vote on the Garden City Rec Center, but was leaning towards voting “NO”. Now I’ve seen some really good discussion points on FB and I am now leaning towards voting “YES” but I am still unsure.
So below are several questions I have heard discussed and my thoughts on them. These were originally posted on facebook and are public posts if you want to discuss them there. Feel free to comment as long as you are kind and civil. I like online discussions as it allows everyone's voice to be heard, unlike public meetings. If you discuss it on social media please use the hashtag #GardenCityRec so we can see people discussing the topic.
Question #1: Is it unethical to raise taxes for a rec center when the biggest burden will go to 2nd home owners who have no vote on the matter?
My Answer: Maybe.
When someone chose to have a 2nd home they knew (or should have known) they will pay the local property taxes which will go to things that directly benefits them (roads to their home, law enforcement if their house is burglarized, fire dept., etc.) but also to things that don’t directly benefit them (operating local schools), but also to things that they may or may not have an opportunity to enjoy (parks, libraries, pool, or rec centers.)
However, I can see how it would be frustrating for a 2nd homeowner if they know they’ll never use a rec center or library or pool.
I am actually in favor of the state doing something so that a 2nd home owner has at least some kind of vote in an area of a 2nd home, even if it is not the same weight as a full time resident. But that is another discussion.
But then again, parks, libraries, rec center do a lot to improve standards of living and economies. A rec center will attract more full time residents and also more off-season tourists which should help the economy of our area which should improve property values (which is usually a good thing) but should also allow for infrastructure and other things that make Bear Lake a better place to live or visit (like a bigger grocery store!) The 2nd home owners would get the benefit of using these other things when they come to visit.
So this makes me lean to a "yes" vote.
Question #2: Is there a better way to fund a rec center in our area?
My Answer: I don’t know.
I was advocating for a special service district (SSD) that would at least include Sweetwater and Swan Creek, so as to have a larger tax base, (I think this was originally Bobbie Coray's idea) but these are the problems I heard with that:
-The SSD would be under the county commissioners control and the current commissioners would not be likely to support the rec center, so it wouldn’t happen.
-An SSD wouldn’t have a general fund to help cover the operating costs the first year or two while it is “ramping up”.
If the option of an SSD is do-able, then I think it is better. I would have loved it if we would have explored this fully first before deciding to put this on the ballot. This was the biggest reason I was leaning towards a “no” vote last week.
However, when I learned that we are not obligated to take the bond then I switched and decided to vote “yes”. I want it to pass just in case this is not an option. If it does pass, I hope town council will first pause and fully explore other financing options like an SSD. But if it for sure will not work, then town council can go forward with things without having to wait another year. I also heard town council would explore options like corporate sponsors to help fund it so we don’t have to use much of the bond.
Maybe this is putting to much faith in our town council, but because I know all five of them personally I feel like I can trust them. If this was the federal or state government I'd vehemently vote "no" until it was proposed perfectly.
Question #3: Is the timing on this right?
My answer: I’d say yes, but only because the town council has 5 years to decide how and if to take the bond money.
Originally I wondered about this. I originally thought the city should wait one more year because of the unknowns about who will be running this country and the potential of a recession, but I didn’t know that the city doesn’t HAVE to take the bond if it passes, and has the five years to decide.
Again, I would hope our town council would at least wait until January to even begin discussing whether or not to move forward with the rec center. Town council should wait and see what happens with the election and its effects on the economy.
Question #4: If this doesn’t pass, can we do some more research and propose it again?
My Answer:
Technically "yes", but psychologically probably "no".
If the rec center only gets a few yes votes then I’d be willing to bet this rec center idea goes away for a long time. The town council will assume not enough people want it and not pursue it. (Incidentally, I think this is fine. If people really do hate the idea of a rec center then the democratic process should allow them to say so. This wouldn’t be the end of the world if it happened.)
In reality I actually highly doubt the rec center bond even has a chance of passing.
By default people vote no to things that increase taxes. So it is an uphill battle. Then the majority will not likely become informed enough to consider that there could be enough benefits to justify the tax. Then there is a ton of misinformation floating around that will cause some who would have voted yes to instead vote no. Then there are some people who justifiably will vote no because it will personally not benefit them at all. So that leaves very few people who might vote yes.
If it happened to lose by a small amount, then I think the city might try it again. However, at this point, I am not sure what they could propose differently to get enough yes votes.
So if you like the idea of the rec center but just have a specific problem with the way it is on the ballot you could vote yes and kindly make your point to the town council why you need such and such changed. either that or if it doesn’t pass be vocal that you do want the rec center but you want “such and such” changed.
Question #5: Can Garden City afford it?
My Answer:
I don’t know.
Darin Pugmire raises some very valid concerns in his facebook posts. He pointed out some infrastructure things coming up in the future that could be pricey and I hope the city is not going to have raise taxes again to cover those costs. If it came down to covering those costs without raising taxes or the rec center, then I would say no to the rec center.
But again, I would hope that the town council would be wise enough that if this passed they would look at these issues and look at a feasibility study that would take these issues into account before proceeding to take the bond money and do the rec center. I do wish this would have been done before it was put on the ballot though. Again, it is easier for me to put faith in the town council to make the right choice because I know them.
Question #6: Should a government entity build such a facility?
My Answer: I don’t know.
I am torn on this one. I do believe in limited government and that the primary function of government is to secure the inalienable rights and freedoms of individuals. But I also believe it should do things to support public health and safety. I am also not against things that government can do that lift the standards of living for everyone. I fully acknowledge this could be a slippery slope. I am not sure where the line gets drawn, but I am glad that at least this is getting put to a vote (albeit only for those who can vote – see my question #1) instead of being left to only a few to decide.
On the one hand, almost universally towns and cities in the US support things like roads, schools, and parks. As was pointed out by Jennifer Huefner, a rec center is basically an indoor park. And I do see the positive effects of green spaces, play places, and things that contribute to health (especially with the enormous rise of obesity).
On the other hand, could a rec center be provided by a private business and is this directly competing with that? Government shouldn’t compete with free market.
Rightly so, people have pointed out that if this facility could have been built and been profitable it would have been done, although you could also argue that isn’t true…not everything that is a good business venture is automatically developed; it is only developed if there is an entrepreneur with the free time and resources is willing to do it. I don’t see anyone showing interest in building a rec center, and should we bank on someone wanting to do it eventually?
There are very few things municipalities can legally do (in the state of Utah) and building a rec center is one of them. I think that is for a good reason.
I know some have said this facility can do a lot to support public safety too by being a safe-shelter to gather in during or after a natural disaster. This would be a really good thing for the area. If something big happened during the summer, it would be nice to have a large public facility for gathering.
(Assuming you agree with my thoughts on the role of government) does the rec center support public health and safety and do things to lift the standards of living enough to make it okay for a government entity to do it? I think that is going to be different for everyone.
In summary:
I think I am in the minority that know our town council well enough that I have put my faith in them to do the right thing if this somehow passed. I have been to most of the town council meetings the last two years, including the last several months of meetings (or talked to them after the meeting) in which this has been discussed so I know some of the background and why things happened the way they did. Yes, they could have done things a different way and it might have been better. Hindsight is 20/20.
So I do understand why someone would vote no on this. Which is fine. Like I mentioned I have little hope of this passing, but I hope that my thoughts will help give this a greater chance of having a second chance in the future. Hopefully this post will at least helped you make a more informed decision whether that is now or on a future vote about the rec center if there is one.
I would love to hear your thoughts and ideas (as long as you are kind, civil, and logical). Please share them with me via Facebook.
Respectfully,
Joey Stocking
Garden City Resident
Friday, October 28, 2016
Accreditation And Associate Degrees
Anita Weston, reporter
Rich Civic Times
RANDOLPH, Utah. October 19, 2016. Principal Rick Larsen informed the Board that the district is
currently working on the accreditation program.
This evaluation must be done every five years. In the past, the school district has worked
with the North Western Accreditation Association. However, this year, it is through the
AdvancED Performance Accreditation Group.
High schools must be accredited in order for their credits to be
accepted by higher education.
Work was begun on this accreditation program when school
started and will continue to the end of this school year. This gives the school a chance to see what
they do and who they really are. High
schools are supposed to produce responsible students and have students career
ready by graduation. Larsen feels
that Rich County
The opportunity to earn an associate degree at the same time
high school requirements are taken is possible.
A CNA degree along with the high school diploma is available. The 900-hour automotive engineering robotics
program is available at the same time high school is being completed. There are five or six students who are
getting this 900-hour certificate this coming year. Students can earn up to 90 college credits
prior to their high school graduation.
Very few schools have such programs and opportunities available to their
students.
The School Board is responsible for one section of the
accreditation form. This needs to be
taken care of, and it was suggested that the board set aside a work session
after the November Board Meeting in order to begin filling in the necessary
requirements from their vantage point to help complete the accreditation
program requirements.
Many of the opportunities available to Rich County
The robotics program is new and was available for the first
time starting last year. Mr. Taylor, the
new student counselor, took the robotics students on a field trip to Autoliv
Manufacturing Company in Logan ,
Utah
Bridgerland is getting a new building in Logan, funded by the
legislature. There are going to offer
more opportunities in the health services area and a full RN program will be
available. Most of the programs
currently handled by Bridgerland are high quality programs.
Principal Kip Motta noted that there is always a career day at
Bridgerland that is very helpful and informational to students. However, this day is usually scheduled near
the end of school when all of the required testing is being given. He asked if it would be possible to have
Bridgerland have an earlier date for this kind of activity thereby allowing
more schools to participate in this activity. Eric. Wamsley, the Board representative to Bridgerland, said he would make
that request to Bridgerland.
Rich Middle School Honors
Students of
the Month October
8th Travis
Gifford Brooke Handley
7th Chloe
Negus Danny Staheli
6th Elly
Argyle Jayken Downing
Citizens of
the Month October
8th Mady
Weston Kennedy Eastman
7th Hayden
Weston Hannah
Hillier
6th Logan
Cluff Ryann Stapel
Second Home Resident Votes No On Rec Center
To The Editor:
Some
thoughts on the proposed rec center.
To give you
some background, I don’t live in Garden
City, but am looking to buy property there within the next few months and build
there later on as a secondary homeowner.
I grew up in Laketown, worked in Garden City and love Bear Lake, but am
not in love with the idea of a new rec center as I understand it. If I were to build a secondary home worth
$400,000, not receiving the tax exemption as residents do, I would be paying
nearly $600 extra per year in property taxes.
If I were to then buy an annual pass for my family I would need to pay
at least that amount again. Here are
four of my thoughts:
1. I agree that a rec center would help
extend the season and has the potential to be a great asset, if done
right. I think a indoor pool aimed
towards families would draw the most money and value, something similar to the
St. George or Tooele aquatic centers. I
could see a lot of single-use fee money coming in from that. Throw in some other high-adventure-type
activities and this could really extend the season and be a lot of fun for the
youth. I don’t see tourists using this
as a gym or weight room to any large extent, ...possibly the six pickleball
courts however. (I’m joking on the pickleball of course) Certainly a gym and
some racquetball courts would be used year around, but 6.3 million dollars
seems like an awful lot for that amenity.
2. There are a few other things that
seem off in the posted budget. I am not
sure who estimated that the center would bring in $16,500 from league fees, but
that would never happen. The center
would be lucky to have leagues, period, let alone collect sizeable fees. The
contingency case on the city website states that the rec center could lose
close to $50,000 a year on operating expenses. To me it seems like a little more
study and discussion would be warranted to avoid a gamble like that.
3. I hate to see this being promoted as
a possible location to house an elementary or elementary gym. It would be
disheartening see a very small school morph into two extremely small schools. Mayor Sphuler recently said, “With the majority of North Rich Elementary School kids
coming from Garden City, there is a growing need to build an elementary school
in our town….recreation centers serve a dual purpose. During school hours the
recreation center is used by the school's student body; however, when school is
not in session then the facility is open to the public thus maximizing
resources and tax dollars.” These comments make
me wonder if there are motives other than what has been promoted behind this
project. North Rich Elementary is one of
the best in the state with great personnel and facilities. I would hate to think of the friendships that
would be forfeited if this rec center turned into “Garden City Public Charter School.”
4. There will be other chances to vote
on a similar bond. If I were a full time
resident, I would vote yes, but not now.
I would wait until more details were made public, until more money was
saved, and more people were in agreement.
It has got the community thinking, that’s good, but I would hate to see
this done without more consideration. If
it does pass, I guess I’ll have to give those lots in Sweetwater one more
look. I hope the residents make the
right choice.
Monday, October 24, 2016
Vote NO On Rec Center Councilman Says
To The Editor:
As a town council member and after being thrown under the bus by our mayor I feel I should clarify a few things regarding the proposed REC CENTER. If any of you read the last week post from Scott Tolentino and then the rebuttal by our mayor, then you would have noticed that because I was the only council member that didn’t think it should go to the ballot I was cast down. I hope this will clarify I few items of concern that I have and that should be made as a note for all of you that are still wondering if you should vote in favor or against the Rec Center.
When I was first elected into the Town Council around 6 years ago I brought up the fact that we needed to consider a Rec Center. That was immediately shut down and wasn’t something that needed to be addressed. I didn’t push it after that. I have been in favor of getting a Rec Center in our area because I would like to be able to have that as something else to do as a resident of Garden City.
I was in favor of going through the data points to find out if this Rec Center was something that could be done for a reasonable cost as well as something that could self-sustain itself moving forward. I voted, along with the other council and mayor to spend $5,000 to go towards getting the information that would be needed to see if this could work.
We got our analysis back and after considering it further and after going to the presentation I found items within it that made me even more uncomfortable.
1st: It was stated that more than likely we would have to borrow from our general fund around $50,000 the first year. After that time, according to the statistics it would balance itself out.
That for me was a cause of alarm. The idea that our general funds would have to be used to get through the first year made me contemplate what about future years?
2nd: Could the size of the building be cut in half and still be favorable?
At first I was worried it wasn’t big enough but when the costs associated with this Rec Center came available I was concerned with that. My thoughts have turned to how could we save some money and plan for now and then add on for the future. It was first estimated to be around 3 million dollars and then it jumped to 6.5 million and the size of the building was shrunk on top of that. Yes, we can approve it and then decide to make it smaller and cut the costs down but is that how government should work things? Would you think that is what you call budgeting wisely? I sure don’t feel that is how we should operate.
3rd: Overhead, maintenance, work load.
As of right now we don’t have 2 city parks but we have 3 because they are all in different areas. That was also something else that I wasn’t in favor of however I was also beat out by the council and the mayor on that as well. The reason I bring this is up is that we already have 2 parks of which we have a hard time keeping them together as well as adding more to them. We have a huge debt that we need to come up with to complete our Heritage Park so that it could be utilized more. Those costs will be around $300,000-$500,00 thousand dollars to complete. Now the costs of these is substantial and yes they come from other tax dollars but the reason I bring this up is because of the costs of our maintenance on just these 2 parks let alone the cost of now our 3rd Park with the dollar amount I can’t go into because I am not sure exactly what our full intension will be to do at this location in the future.
Now we would have to take care of and maintain 3 parks and then a Rec Center when at this time we are barely able to take care of the 2 parks that are now up and running without any add-ons. Does this not make you stop and wonder?
4th : Is the location the correct spot for this large structure? Should we perhaps look at moving it to now a new 7-acre area so we do have room for expansion?
5th: I am constantly hearing on social media that we won’t be the ones to pay for it but the 2nd home owners. They will pay more because they are not permanent residents of Garden City. Have we stopped on considered the impact that could impose on where people decide to build when they come for a 2nd home in the Bear Lake area? Look at how many homes went in last year in Garden City, most of which were additions, but now look at how many are building in Garden City in 2016.
You can find all of this out so I won’t throw out speculation numbers but the drop between the 2 years in somewhere around 80+% negative from 2015-2016. Now let’s stop and consider adding another number of dollars that we will impose on these families and do we not understand that they will look for another location, outside of city limits to build their homes? What will that do to our infrastructure dollars that have been statically set up which dictates how much money our water bills are too be? Has this been thought out? What needs the most attentions is our infrastructure and by adding this amount onto our 2nd home owners do we see that it would come back to bite us in the end? If we cannot reach our projected numbers do, we want our water bills to go up not 3% annually but 10% to make up the proposed indifference? Yes, I am speculating numbers however do you not see this as an alarming issue? I won’t go into the road impact fees which are generated by home builders but that could cause less roads and less maintenance on future and existing roads as well…shouldn’t that be a cause for consideration?
These are reasons why I am not voting in favor of the Rec Center now. I am not oblivious to the fact that we need something like this but I don’t feel the timing is right nor are the statistics that we have received. We need to go back to the drawing board and look at all other options and just take a step back. Is putting the cart before the horse something that local government should be doing? Stop and think about that before you cast your vote.
The business community is for it. They want it to help feed their pockets which helps feed all of our pockets in our small city but sometimes as business’s we don’t look at it in all circumstances. Most of the business’s that are for it don’t even reside in Garden City. I do reside in Garden City however I do look at it from another avenue and that is with both eyes wide open!
It is up to you as Garden City residence to make the decision. If it goes through then I as a Town Council Member will do what I can to make sure that we can sustain it but I hope I won’t have to do that, at least now. We have been asked to budget wisely…is this wise budgeting? I would say absolutely not!
Respectfully,
Darin Pugmire
As a town council member and after being thrown under the bus by our mayor I feel I should clarify a few things regarding the proposed REC CENTER. If any of you read the last week post from Scott Tolentino and then the rebuttal by our mayor, then you would have noticed that because I was the only council member that didn’t think it should go to the ballot I was cast down. I hope this will clarify I few items of concern that I have and that should be made as a note for all of you that are still wondering if you should vote in favor or against the Rec Center.
When I was first elected into the Town Council around 6 years ago I brought up the fact that we needed to consider a Rec Center. That was immediately shut down and wasn’t something that needed to be addressed. I didn’t push it after that. I have been in favor of getting a Rec Center in our area because I would like to be able to have that as something else to do as a resident of Garden City.
I was in favor of going through the data points to find out if this Rec Center was something that could be done for a reasonable cost as well as something that could self-sustain itself moving forward. I voted, along with the other council and mayor to spend $5,000 to go towards getting the information that would be needed to see if this could work.
We got our analysis back and after considering it further and after going to the presentation I found items within it that made me even more uncomfortable.
1st: It was stated that more than likely we would have to borrow from our general fund around $50,000 the first year. After that time, according to the statistics it would balance itself out.
That for me was a cause of alarm. The idea that our general funds would have to be used to get through the first year made me contemplate what about future years?
2nd: Could the size of the building be cut in half and still be favorable?
At first I was worried it wasn’t big enough but when the costs associated with this Rec Center came available I was concerned with that. My thoughts have turned to how could we save some money and plan for now and then add on for the future. It was first estimated to be around 3 million dollars and then it jumped to 6.5 million and the size of the building was shrunk on top of that. Yes, we can approve it and then decide to make it smaller and cut the costs down but is that how government should work things? Would you think that is what you call budgeting wisely? I sure don’t feel that is how we should operate.
3rd: Overhead, maintenance, work load.
As of right now we don’t have 2 city parks but we have 3 because they are all in different areas. That was also something else that I wasn’t in favor of however I was also beat out by the council and the mayor on that as well. The reason I bring this is up is that we already have 2 parks of which we have a hard time keeping them together as well as adding more to them. We have a huge debt that we need to come up with to complete our Heritage Park so that it could be utilized more. Those costs will be around $300,000-$500,00 thousand dollars to complete. Now the costs of these is substantial and yes they come from other tax dollars but the reason I bring this up is because of the costs of our maintenance on just these 2 parks let alone the cost of now our 3rd Park with the dollar amount I can’t go into because I am not sure exactly what our full intension will be to do at this location in the future.
Now we would have to take care of and maintain 3 parks and then a Rec Center when at this time we are barely able to take care of the 2 parks that are now up and running without any add-ons. Does this not make you stop and wonder?
4th : Is the location the correct spot for this large structure? Should we perhaps look at moving it to now a new 7-acre area so we do have room for expansion?
5th: I am constantly hearing on social media that we won’t be the ones to pay for it but the 2nd home owners. They will pay more because they are not permanent residents of Garden City. Have we stopped on considered the impact that could impose on where people decide to build when they come for a 2nd home in the Bear Lake area? Look at how many homes went in last year in Garden City, most of which were additions, but now look at how many are building in Garden City in 2016.
You can find all of this out so I won’t throw out speculation numbers but the drop between the 2 years in somewhere around 80+% negative from 2015-2016. Now let’s stop and consider adding another number of dollars that we will impose on these families and do we not understand that they will look for another location, outside of city limits to build their homes? What will that do to our infrastructure dollars that have been statically set up which dictates how much money our water bills are too be? Has this been thought out? What needs the most attentions is our infrastructure and by adding this amount onto our 2nd home owners do we see that it would come back to bite us in the end? If we cannot reach our projected numbers do, we want our water bills to go up not 3% annually but 10% to make up the proposed indifference? Yes, I am speculating numbers however do you not see this as an alarming issue? I won’t go into the road impact fees which are generated by home builders but that could cause less roads and less maintenance on future and existing roads as well…shouldn’t that be a cause for consideration?
These are reasons why I am not voting in favor of the Rec Center now. I am not oblivious to the fact that we need something like this but I don’t feel the timing is right nor are the statistics that we have received. We need to go back to the drawing board and look at all other options and just take a step back. Is putting the cart before the horse something that local government should be doing? Stop and think about that before you cast your vote.
The business community is for it. They want it to help feed their pockets which helps feed all of our pockets in our small city but sometimes as business’s we don’t look at it in all circumstances. Most of the business’s that are for it don’t even reside in Garden City. I do reside in Garden City however I do look at it from another avenue and that is with both eyes wide open!
It is up to you as Garden City residence to make the decision. If it goes through then I as a Town Council Member will do what I can to make sure that we can sustain it but I hope I won’t have to do that, at least now. We have been asked to budget wisely…is this wise budgeting? I would say absolutely not!
Respectfully,
Darin Pugmire
Beaver Mountain To Add Adaptive Skiing
By Sean Dolan, staff writer
Herald Journal
A new building is under construction on the slopes of Beaver Mountain to provide easy access for
people with disabilities to ski some of the best snow on Earth.
Common Ground Outdoor Activities, a local nonprofit, is an outdoor recreation group for people with
disabilities. The 23yearold organization holds around 350 activities a year for 3,200 people, often
putting on three or four events per day during the summer. They have a strong adaptive cycling
program, with 30 hand cycles, but they have struggled with their adaptive ski program.
Sammie Mcfarlane, executive director of Common Ground, said it is difficult to haul their specialized
ski equipment up Beaver Mountain four or five days a week and it was difficult to find space in the
lodge to make it accessible for their participants.
“We needed our own space,” Mcfarlane said.
Mcfarlane said the Seeholzers, owners of Beaver Mountain, have been incredible.
Marge Seeholzer has been watching the volunteers, employees and clients of Common Ground
bring their heavy equipment back and forth to town every time they come. Seeholzer said they have
been wanting to find space for the organization for years, and they kept looking at different places
and weighed their options and finally decided on a location for a new building.
“It’s pretty exciting that it’s now a reality,” Seeholzer said.
Common Ground accommodates people of all ages with a physical, cognitive or mental disability.
They have programs for U.S. military veterans with physical disabilities and PTSD. The organization
holds destination camping trips to the Arches National Park and Grand Teton National Park.
Herald Journal
A new building is under construction on the slopes of Beaver Mountain to provide easy access for
people with disabilities to ski some of the best snow on Earth.
Common Ground Outdoor Activities, a local nonprofit, is an outdoor recreation group for people with
disabilities. The 23yearold organization holds around 350 activities a year for 3,200 people, often
putting on three or four events per day during the summer. They have a strong adaptive cycling
program, with 30 hand cycles, but they have struggled with their adaptive ski program.
Sammie Mcfarlane, executive director of Common Ground, said it is difficult to haul their specialized
ski equipment up Beaver Mountain four or five days a week and it was difficult to find space in the
lodge to make it accessible for their participants.
“We needed our own space,” Mcfarlane said.
Mcfarlane said the Seeholzers, owners of Beaver Mountain, have been incredible.
Marge Seeholzer has been watching the volunteers, employees and clients of Common Ground
bring their heavy equipment back and forth to town every time they come. Seeholzer said they have
been wanting to find space for the organization for years, and they kept looking at different places
and weighed their options and finally decided on a location for a new building.
“It’s pretty exciting that it’s now a reality,” Seeholzer said.
Common Ground accommodates people of all ages with a physical, cognitive or mental disability.
They have programs for U.S. military veterans with physical disabilities and PTSD. The organization
holds destination camping trips to the Arches National Park and Grand Teton National Park.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)