Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Home › News › Local News

Council throws cold water on mayor's free pool access

By Daniel J. Chacon, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published June 17, 2008 at 10:31 p.m.
Updated June 18, 2008 at 8:49 a.m.

Text size  

More Local News

More stories »

Sometimes you just can't win.

Last month, Mayor John Hickenlooper announced that Denver youth would get free access this summer to the city's recreation centers, including swimming pools.

On Tuesday, Hickenlooper told council members that the decision to waive fees for youth had generated "more positive response" than just about anything the city has ever done.

Then some council members burst his bubble.

After Councilwoman Jeanne Faatz said she had a "mixed reaction" to the fee waivers, Councilwoman Carla Madison said she heard from a staffer who said the pools were being "inundated" with kids, creating a dangerous situation.

"They were concerned about codes and having too many kids in (the pools)," Madison said. "They only have two lifeguards on duty. Sometimes they were a little concerned about safety."

Hickenlooper said he hadn't heard about any safety concerns, but that he would look into it. He also said it was unacceptable to have a program be so successful that it creates risk.

Later, Councilman Chris Nevitt said the city needed to "think seriously" about how it was going to make up the lost revenue. He said the Parks and Recreation Department is "already squeezed."

"I feel like a hopeless scrooge, but this does put a greater strain on our parks and rec resources — a resource that we're now offering for free," Nevitt said.

Councilwoman Jeanne Robb chimed in next.

Robb said she found it "sort of shocking" to learn about the fee waivers after the council fought so hard to restore rec center hours in the 2008 budget.

Several times, Hickenlooper called the council members' comments "discouraging."

"I'm going to add that to the third category" of the mayor/City Council agenda, Hickenlooper said. "Matters for council discussion. Matters for council information. And discouraging."

To be fair, the mayor did get some "encouraging" words. Council members Peggy Lehmann, Paul Lopez and Judy Montero said they supported the program.

"I say better in the pools than in the streets," Lopez said.

Kelly Marlin, a parks and rec spokeswoman, said safety has been and continues to be a top priority.

"We're regularly having our directors visit our rec centers, and our rec supervisors report back to us on numbers and safety," Marlin said. "We are monitoring that, and we will continue to monitor that."

Comments

  • June 17, 2008

    10:40 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Mike846 writes:

    Why doesn't Hizzoner just give everything away free? He can always run another cute ad campaign with funny colored letters to tell people why they, the working class, need to pay more taxes so he can give stuff away free. The kids are in the middle, I understand. But then, thats never bothered the Democrats before; why should this issue be any different. They tie any issue they want to sell to "the kids" and we don't want to not vote for the good of "the kids", then they do something totally different. I guess Hick will run for Governor, since "Tax" Ritter is fast wearing out his welcome. Then Michael Bennett can run for mayor, and we can have several more years of this madness. I live in Aurora. Denver folks: wake up. You need to throw these idiots out of office, most of your council and anyone from the Hickenlooper "the buck doesn't stop here" crowd. Mike

  • June 17, 2008

    10:49 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Domino writes:

    I suggest that Aurorans shut up about what Denver does with their city services.

  • June 17, 2008

    11:11 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Dems_smell_bad writes:

    Typical liberal…They never think things through.

    I would like to see him take a pay cut to pay for his stupidity.

  • June 18, 2008

    12:59 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    piddyonu writes:

    Da meyor.... Scoopenpooper seems very willing to do whatever it takes to get what he wants...sure looks good for the convention...is this guy fishing for a appointment to obamas or mccains cabinet? (He gives raises to his "key" staff..i.e DIA'S new boss @ 2x's the salary as one example... and offers lottsa lipservice otherwise...how much to fix the sprinklers?) I spoke to the staff at a couple of pools.. no extra staff or hours, no way to check if the kids are Denver residents..(what an awesome babysitting service..and for free)..hey it's cheaper and more accessable than six flags...lol it looks funny, all these kids hanging around the parks adn centers, waiting for the open swim hours.. it could get bad for the parks and kids.. last year they caught kiddy molesters near / in the pools... heck parents just drop them off and let the lord of the fly, type behaviors work for you....Who needs the revenue from those kids and parents...I'm sure he'll bully some employees to give up budget for his glory.... hey scoop.. what's the homeless plan for the convention?? sending them to aurora for the week??? looks like your city is ill prepared for the fun...lets see your wrinkled butt and kid in the pools on yer next commercial...lol... and don't forget to use the country club pool at lowry..monclair.. the wealthy love having you there....

  • June 18, 2008

    9:04 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Bob299 writes:

    I live in Denver and think the fee waiver for children under 17 is a great idea. It keeps kids out of trouble. The conservative estimate of cost was only $275K. The whining coucil members should be voted out of the office.

    I won't comment on the complainers living in Aurora. Living in Aurora is punishment in of itself.

  • June 18, 2008

    9:28 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Michael writes:

    But........its for the kids.

  • June 18, 2008

    9:33 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    anya writes:

    Making access to the pools and rec centers free for kids during the summer was a really good idea, particularly this summer when parents are struggling to pay for just about everything. Denver is doing a GREAT job right now, and our Mayor is showing some good sense.

  • June 18, 2008

    10:40 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    mytwosense writes:

    Yes, Michael and RickyLee, it IS for the kids. Are children yet another segment of the population you turn your nose up at? I suppose if they were all from rich families, you'd have no problem with a fee being waived. God forbid working families get a break in any way, shape, or form, no matter how paltry.

    Anyway, I think this is a wonderful idea. It's something fun for kids to do, probably keeps some of them out of trouble, provides exercise, and gives much needed relief from the summertime heat.

  • June 18, 2008

    11:20 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Cowboy63 writes:

    "Later, Councilman Chris Nevitt said the city needed to "think seriously" about how it was going to make up the lost revenue. He said the Parks and Recreation Department is "already squeezed.""

    Never fear - just raise property taxes and that will cover it!

    "The parents" of "the children" can spare a couple of buck from weed, lotto and porn to pay for their own kids to get into the pool.

    Natural gas to heat the pool is going up 38% - the city will need that lost revenue to cover the utilities bill.

  • June 18, 2008

    11:23 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Jremsoh writes:

    I have run public pools and the argument in the above story of “They only have two lifeguards on duty. Sometimes they were a little concerned about safety." holds no water (pardon the pun).

    There is absolutely no reason what-so-ever to have safety concerns of overcrowding at a city pool. Parks and Rec staff know exactly what the maximum staff/guard to swimmer ratio should be, and there is no excuse for exceeding it. When the limit is reached you stop admitting new people until swimmers leave. All you need is staff who know how to count. While the free swim program may indeed create a stronger demand, the Parks and Rec staff are in complete control over how many swimmers are in any pool area at any one time. If there are truly safety issues as a result of overcrowding it is a result of Parks and Rec staff incompetence.

    Parks and Rec has a very legitimate issue around expenses to accommodate the free swim initiative, but to even insinuate free swim is a safety issue, that tells us we have both an incompetent staff issue to go along with the expense issue.

  • June 18, 2008

    11:29 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Cowboy63 writes:

    Another dumb idea brought to you from a millionaire-politician.

    Walk onto one of Hickenloopers restaurants and tell them you are there for the "free" food. It is interesting how millionaires feel about "free" when it is coming out of their own pockets.

  • June 18, 2008

    11:30 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    gr8fuldude writes:

    BUT IT'S FOR THE CHILDREN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • June 18, 2008

    11:37 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Scott writes:

    Safety issues? The way the the politicians (i.e. mental midgets) are talking, the pool manager will let in any number of people ... if they are paying customers. This is just plain stupidity on the mental midgets part. There are limits to the number of people that a swimming pool can accommodate. When that limit is reached, then the pool manager had better be restricting any more people from entering.

    As far as number of lifeguards (a legitimate concern), take some high school kids and train them to be life guards. Ooh what a novel concept ... NOT.

    Scott

  • June 18, 2008

    11:55 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    spencerr writes:

    Now, replace "free pool access" with "free medical access" and see if you don't get a similar result. The problem with socialism is socialism...it doesn't work you stupid libs!

  • June 18, 2008

    12:51 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Cowboy63 writes:

    spencerr writes: "Now, replace "free pool access" with "free medical access" and see if you don't get a similar result. The problem with socialism is socialism...it doesn't work..."

    Close. Socialism doesn't work unless you're rich! Do you think Hickenlooper, the council members, or any of their families will ever see the inside of a public pool or health clinic?

    Until these free for all policies are forced on the Cherry Creek Country Club - these irresponsible ideas will continue to be floated.

  • June 18, 2008

    1:01 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    spencerr writes:

    You're right Cowboy... socialism works for rich politicians, especially when they are using it to pander to a fickle (and dumb) segment of the American voting populous.

    It's kindergarton politics, where two candidates get in front of the class, and one promises free bubble gum and the other promises free sweet tarts.

    The politicians are smart...they don't really believe in it (socialism), but they know promises of it will get them into power. The people who do believe it are their ignorant and/or idealist pawns.

  • June 18, 2008

    6:35 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    mytwosense writes:

    I see. You people only advocate giving back tax dollars to the rich. God forbid our city have to manage for one lousy summer without the revenue they get from pools. God forbid we give them an exercise in making do with less.

    Once again, if this was someone going to go back to rich people, you kid-haters would be all for it. I bet you scream at children to get off your lawns, too...