In a typical year, the groundbreaking of a huge public pool in a city that lacks one would be a cause for celebration — and probably not a matter of much controversy. But 2009 is not a typical year, and we agree with those who feel that the city would best divert its funds elsewhere.
The $1.5-million earmark for the Pacific Park pool was the cause of some grumbling at Wednesday’s advisory committee meeting, even though this year’s allotment of capital block grants proved easier than some had predicted.
Due to money left over from a Glendale Adventist Medical Center renovation, the committee was able to fund $276,443 in school and nonprofit projects without taking away from the funds set aside for the pool.
But that doesn’t necessarily mean everyone went home happy. A number of groups in town declined to even apply for block grant funds because they felt the pool project was taking too much of the prize.
Council members warned groups off applying if their projects weren’t going to help the neediest, so you warning the committee not to touch that $1.5-million earmark for a swimming pool is hypocritical.
We don’t question the commitment of Najarian and others to bringing a public pool to Glendale.
A project of this kind could serve an infinite number of people, particularly those who lack the money for a gym membership, and Glendale should absolutely pursue it in the future.
Still, we urge the City Council to reconsider the $1.5-million earmark when it votes on the matter next month.
If that amount of money were up for grabs, a number of groups that felt discouraged previously could come out with project ideas, and it would be in the city’s best interest to hear them. Those groups should at least have had a fighting chance for the funds.
As Weaver recently put it, the Pacific Park pool is a “gravy item” for Glendale. And at a time when food is scarce on the table, gravy can wait.
