I agree that a rec district would be nice to have, and I am willing to pay for one with my tax dollars, even though I am a senior, and may not use it very often. But why are we financing the Y.M.C.A.? The open space and trails come later, and may even be something the county will do, since they would be used by anyone. But a rec building and swimming pool is different. Usually a rec district is for and used by the people in the district,since it is paid for by only THEIR tax dollars. Usually a board of directors hires someone on a yearly contract to run the entire day to day operation. The membership is the tax payer, their membershilp fee is their tax bill. Then there is a user fee for certain activities, with a break if you buy in quanity (ex.a month pass for swimming) So why are we paying a membership fee of $450 to $650 to the Y.M.C.A. plus taxes of $36/per$100,000 in property value, so that everyone who is a W.M.C.A. member can use it, and not have to pay the taxes? Why are we being forced to donate to the Y.M.C.A.?
How many other rec districts have done this? Is it legal to force people to donate to a private religious orginazitation through their tax dollars?

By betty

what a boondoggle

I agree. We should not have to pay for the YMCA to be built and pay full price for membership as well. This whole rec district idea is simply a boondoggle created by some special interest groups intent on telling the rest of the area what our needs are. The fact of the matter is according to their anticipated budget, almost all of the money will go to build the YMCA and skating rink, two items I will probably not use. Great for the local high school but hardly a "need" for the community as a whole. The rest of the items in the rec district - mostly trails and trail improvement have relatively little to no money budgeted for them. These items were simply added to get people to buy into the dubious idea that this whole thing will add to our property values. I seriously doubt that having a taxpayer built YMCA 6 miles from my house will affect the future selling price of my house by one dollar. If this issue goes to the voters, I urge you to vote no.

By Michael Malboeuf