Re “Time to Re-open the Natatorium”
[Editor’s Note: The writer is a two-term former member of the City Council.]
I believe it was in 2007 when I asked for a special meeting with the School Board Liaison Committee to specifically discuss the Natatorium.
David El Fattel, the former Assistant Superintendent for Business Services, was, in my opinion, unhelpful in coming up with any credible cost estimates that were in writing.
Neither the two School Board members in attendance nor Supt. Myrna Rivera Coté was willing to ask him to either go back to his office to get any estimates that might exist or make up new ones.
It was my feeling after the meetings that the only reason they did take place was to “get me off their backs” in relation to the pool.
Any discussion of the indoor swimming pool I believe must include the following topics:
1) The Natatorium building is a one- use building. There is really no economically feasible way to convert it to any other use.
2) The operating costs of the building must be figured out in advance by people who actually know what they are talking about. As well-intentioned as the City Council and School Board may be, they are not pool experts. There is/was in 2007 a national association of swim teams that had as a part of their organization people who could be called on to give accurate information about the costs of running an indoor pool.
3) To make the use of the pool economically possible, some sponsorship from a large company is going to be needed.
4) In addition to use by the schools, the pool also must be open to the public to both take the pressure off of the Plunge and to allow seniors a warmer “winter” swimming hole.
5) Is there a real need for an additional indoor pool in the Culver City area?
I still believe there is a need for an indoor pool in Culver City, that we can get “real” numbers, that our kids should be taught to swim in water, and that this discussion needs to be vetted and acted on in our lifetime.
Mr. Corlin may be contacted at ad747@lafn.org
