What's Going On: Will Glenwood voters write a blank check?
In 2010, Glenwood residents defeated a $2.2 million proposal that would have started construction of an outdoor swimming pool.
While receiving 49 percent approval, the proposal fell well short of the needed 60-percent total needed to pass.
Now, four years later, Glenwood voters will once again go to the polls in just a few weeks to decide the fate of a second outdoor swimming pool proposal.
However, this time around, there are three significant changes: first, instead of partnering with the YMCA, the city will build the pool on school property, allowing for use of a soon-to-be-constructed gymnasium; secondly, the price has more than doubled from $2.2 to $4.7 million; and third, voters won’t know just how much it’s going to personally cost them when they go to the polls.
That’s the part that really intrigues me. The City Council is essentially asking voters to write them a blank check. On the low end, the new pool will result in about $45 in new taxes annually on an average sized home. On the high end, the number could swell up to more than $180.
As a homeowner, when I go to vote on a measure that will increase my taxes, I like to know exactly how much that amount will be and what benefit the proposal has to me and my family.
As for the latter, an outdoor pool like the one Glenwood is considering building would be a boon to the community. Undeniably, the facility will be extremely popular not only with in-town residents, but those from surrounding communities. As such, retailers should benefit as well from the increased out-of-town traffic coming to Glenwood to enjoy the pool.
But I would have a very difficult time reconciling that very tangible benefit with a very intangible expense.
At the low end, $45 a year doesn’t sound too bad. That’s not even $4 a month. My budget could withstand that.
But $180? Now that’s a much larger figure altogether. Suddenly, that monthly expense swells to about $15.
Each month, my wife and I “round up” our mortgage payment to the nearest hundred. We do this for two reasons: one, the figure is easier to deal with when it’s a nice round number and two, and maybe more importantly, by paying a little extra each month, we reduce the principal (albeit slightly) and will in theory, pay off the home sooner.
A $4 increase would cut into that extra amount. A $15 increase would eat it up entirely.
One Glenwood council member echoed similar concerns when voting against placing this proposal on the May ballot. She wanted to wait until August when more concrete numbers in terms of cost could be presented to the voters. The reason for the current cost variance is the city simply doesn’t know how much money will be raised through donations, fundraisers and via grants. Allocating some additional time would help define some of those unknowns.
It would also help in terms of soliciting donations. If you come to me asking for money, and I know the money is already there through a voter-approved tax increase, I’m going to be much less inclined to donate.
Regardless, I’m just an interested bystander in this issue. I don’t live in Glenwood and don’t have a vote.
However, the outcome of this vote will most likely impact Red Oak as well, which has over the years considered its own public pool project.
Should this one be approved by voters in Mills County, the need for a similar facility in Montgomery County may be somewhat lessened. Or, the opposite could happen with a keeping-up-with-the-Jones mindset.
Beyond that though, what’s most compelling to me is this blank check scenario. I’d have a hard time endorsing that proposal as a voter. I’m interested to see if Glenwood voters share that same reservation.
Gregory Orear is the General Manager/Editor of the Red Oak Express and Glenwood Opinion-Tribune. He can be contacted at publisher@redoakexpress.com.