Skip to content

Gibsons needs its pool

Editor: Regarding the comments by SCRD official Ian Hall (“SCRD explains reasons to keep Gibsons pool closed,” Sept. 11), he doesn’t seem to realize that taking public transit to Sechelt for a short swim takes the better part of the day.

Editor:

Regarding the comments by SCRD official Ian Hall (“SCRD explains reasons to keep Gibsons pool closed,” Sept. 11), he doesn’t seem to realize that taking public transit to Sechelt for a short swim takes the better part of the day. Even by car this commute will take up two to three hours of the day plus fuel. For those who work, this is simply not doable during the week. For those retired, it’s a disincentive to stay active. And what about our kids?

Yes, the Gibsons pool has a smaller attendance than Sechelt because a) it is a smaller facility and b) it has a smaller catchment area. However, note that Pender Harbour is scheduled for reopening this week, despite being approximately the same travel distance to Sechelt and size. Please tell me the logic and fairness of that.

Gibsons recently undertook an expensive replacement of the pool’s hot tub as well as other numerous upgrades over the years. The SCRD approved of these investments for the Gibsons community. But now the Gibsons taxpayers must do without the very recreational amenity they just paid to improve. It doesn’t make sense.

Our pool has been closed since mid-March. We’ve waited patiently over the summer, swimming in the ocean and trying to stay fit. Because that matters. We were told that “when safety protocols are in place” the pool would reopen. But now we’re told reopening the pool just isn’t “cost effective.” What’s next?

There is more at stake here than simple bean counting. Any benefit analysis needs to consider the community’s health, fitness and sense of well-being during these trying times. Open our pool please.

Dale Morgan, Gibsons