Madison... The City Without a Pool

It has become quite apparent that there is a swimming pool situation in the city of Madison, Wisconsin.  The situation thrives on the complete absence of a public city pool and the hotly debated presence of the situation itself.  Throughout this project we have come to analyze the initial stages of the social, cultural, and ideological foundations of the Madison public pool situation.  By using the 1989 City of Madison pool report, 2000 U.S. Census, internet research, and personal interviews and debates, we have put together this article as New Pool Activists.  As our research progressed, we came to realize there are cities very similar to Madison that have a number of public pools, furthering the quality of life among its residents. 

            The six cities that we chose to use as a comparison to Madison are Akron, OH, Tacoma, WA, Providence, RI, Des Moines, IA, Eugene, OR, and Rochester, NY.  We chose these six cities for various reasons, but will highlight three of these cities in this article.  First of all, they are all located in the northern regions of the U.S., so they all have similar weather patterns.  Weather can play a large role in the availability of an outdoor public pool.  Second, each of the six chosen cities has a population of roughly 200,000 people.  We figured that the cities chosen must be equal in the number of residents in order to have a well-developed public pool situation.  Third, we researched specific information about each of the six cities that help compare and contrast to Madison itself.  For example, we noted information on the median age, percentage married, average family income, and the number of people below the poverty line. 

            According to the 2000 U.S. Census, all of the cities, including Madison, have a median age range between 28.1 and 34.2.  This means that most of the population is in this age bracket. Doesn’t is seem like people in this age bracket are the people that have young kids?  All six of the cities we researched have at least one public pool, but why doesn’t Madison?  In addition, the Census noted that Madison has an average family income of $59, 840, meanwhile, Rochester, NY only has $31, 257 and they have 20 public pools!  The question then arises about private pools and families that have the available income to take their kids to private clubs and community centers.  Is that what is occurring in Madison? Since Madison has such a high family income, do the children just go to public pools?  The answer is uncertain, but what is certain is that the other similar six cities have public pools and from these pools comes many benefits.

            Des Moines, Iowa, population 198,682 has two main public pools.  The Ashworth Pool and the Birdland Pool both are open only from June 6th through August 17th.  The Park and Recreation Board in Des Moines says that, “the function of pools is to operate the city’s seven aquatic centers.”  This quote ties to the private pool question from above.  In Iowa, the public pools are beneficial in helping make the operation of the private centers run smoothly.  Another contributing factor to having a public pool in a city this size is the presence of colleges or universities.  Some would say that a college takes up a lot of space, space that could be used for a public pool, and that a college brings a large amount of young adults to the population, young adults that for the most part don’t use public pools anymore.  If this is the case then maybe that is a reason that Madison doesn’t have a public pool?  Although in Des Moines, Iowa there are two good size colleges, Drake University and Iowa State University.  Madison strikes out again.

            Moving right along to Eugene, Oregon, we found that there are seven “wading pools” spread through the city.  They call them wading pools and they are all located in community parks available to all free of charge.  In Eugene, 95% of the use of the public pools is for swimming lessons and instruction in water safety and fitness.  Over 2100 activities are offered annually at these pools.  Doesn’t that sound like a major benefit to a city such as Madison?  Again, the University of Oregon is located in Eugene, along with three mini-colleges, but they still have seven public pools.  Well maybe Madison doesn’t have public pools because we have Lake Mendota and Lake Monona?  Wrong again.  In Eugene, Oregon, two main rivers run through Eugene, proving that public pools are useful for many residents, regardless of what bodies of water are in the city.

            The poorest and most populous of the six cities researched, Rochester, New York has twenty public pools!  Rochester sees itself as a cybercity, meaning that they employ a lot of people in high tech industries.  One main quality that a public pool brings to a city is employment.  Public pools and all of the activities that come from them can really bring revenues to a city.  Pools are not that expensive to keep maintenance on, so why can’ t Madison step up, put more jobs into the market, and have a public pool?

The concept of bringing a public pool to Madison is not new to the city.  Most recently, the idea was explored in 1989 through a large-scale public pool report done by an independent objective study commission assigned by the city.  This report briefly brought the idea of building a public pool to the forefront of city policy maker’s agendas before it was unexplainably abandoned shortly thereafter.  Among the contents of the pool report is a city-wide public opinion poll taken in 1989 that showed 63 percent of the city’s residents to be strongly in favor of building a public pool in the city of Madison, while only 24 percent were not in favor of the pool.  As there has been no follow-up progress in regards to building a pool, why has this strong public support been ignored?

The 1989 city of Madison pool report examines thirteen different sites for possibly locating a public pool within the city, and further more looks at the estimated demand for pool usage in the years 1990 and again in 2015.  Using population statistics in regards to Madison, estimates of demand are made using 85 percent of a peak pool attendance of 6 percent of the city ’s population.  Using these numbers, 17 square feet of pool space were attributed to each person and a 32,600 square foot deficit was found for the year 1990. This deficit then increases reaching nearly 54,000 in the year 2015.  Using the public opinion survey as a basis, a deficit of 37,794 square feet was reached for the year 1990 in outdoor pools alone, and this was done while assigning only 13 square feet to each person.  Through these two methods the city concluded that there was approximately a 35,000 square foot deficit for outdoor facilities in Madison in 1990.  In general, these numbers show that outdoor, not indoor pools are where the deficit lies and thus is the problem area that needs the city’s attention.  We have already reached the year 2003, which means the city is over the halfway point in reaching the projected 2015 pool space deficit.  Are Madison’s citizens supposed to wait until this projection is realized in full before action is taken?

Upon conclusion of the city’s pool report, a recommendation is made stating that not only one, but three public pools should be built within Madison to properly address the city’s need.  It is recommended that the city build three large aquatic facilities, located on the west, east and central parts of Madison.  Specifically, these locations are Elver Park on the west side, either Reindahl or Warner Park on the east side, and at Olin Park in central Madison.  These three pools would have a combined surface area equaling approximately that of the projected year 2015 deficit.  Of course, being that we are half way to 2015 as it is, new size and deficit calculations will need to be made to more accurately represent current and future demand levels, as it is estimated that the pools would last 40+ years before needing any major facelifts.  The recommendation for the pools suggests that there be large recreational and competitive areas making up the pools, with the centrally located pool being the largest of the three.  This central pool was also suggested to feature an extended swim season, which would cover nine months of the year and would be built and heated accordingly.

The question that now lies in the hands of both the citizens of Madison and the city’s officials is why no action has been taken in regards to these recommendations, and further more, how the city plans to cope with a demand that has had fourteen years grow and that will not be put on the back burner again.  Madison resident, Ted Petersen, says that one of the reasons that the referendum may have been stalled is that the people governing our city are older and most do not have kids in their households, greatly reducing their need for a public pool.   If the city was governed by a younger generation with children who used the lakes in the summer, this referendum may have had a better chance of survival.

While Madison escapes many environmental troubles encountered in nearby cities like Milwaukee and Chicago, certain concerns demand the construction of public pools.  While Madison is a relatively clean city, much of the city’s uncollected waste runs off into the same lakes that swimmers make their home.  Madison’s lakes act as a sponge to the city’s storm and sewer discharges.  Litter, pollutants, animal excrement, lawn fertilizers and herbicides all flow into Madison’s lakes and gather in the muddy lakebeds.  Petersen says that he refuses to take his kids to the lakes because “they are so disgusting and unhealthy that the mere thought grosses me out.”

While Madison acts as an industrial and business powerhouse, the city remains merely a stone’s throw away from massive agriculture production.  The Yahara River, located on Lake Mendota’s north shore, feeds Mendota and Monona with agricultural runoff.  Agricultural waste, manure, algae promoting fertilizers and other chemical pollutants all gather in Madison’s lakes.  The conditions provided by city waste and rural waste make Madison’s lakes an ideal environment for dangerous bacteria and pollutants.  Furthermore, an unknown number of cattle killed by anthrax at the turn of the century remain buried at Willow’s beach on Lake Mendota.  Erosion could eventually expose swimmers to this deadly disease.

Furthermore, an E Coli bacterium from fecal matter plagues Madison’s lakes.  Last year E Coli bacteria populations forced Lake Wingra to close to swimmers.  Swimmers in this small lake have often blamed poor water quality for infections and health problems.  Wingra acts as a warning sign that Madison’s lakes may face dangerous bacteria levels soon.  Although Wingra is the smallest and most sensitive of the Madison lakes, the closing of Wingra in the summer may indicate future closings of Mendota and Monona.

Madison’s current swimming facilities would fail to meet the population’s demands if an ecological disaster were to strike.  At the current time, Madison has no safe, publicly accessible alternative to lake swimming.  Were a chemical or biological spill to occur either in the lakes or in the watersheds, Madison ’s swimmers would be caught unprepared.  Lake closings would not detour the most die-hard of swimmers in the sweltering summer months.  An alternative must be created to detour unsafe swimming during future beach closings.

In the long run, pool construction would cost less than cleaning the swimming areas of Madison’s lakes.  A University of Wisconsin survey revealed that Madison residents were willing to spend upwards of $50 million dollars to clean the lakes.  Public pool construction costs pale in comparison to this massive figure.  While the water quality in Madison ’ s lakes must be maintained, alternatives to lakes must be investigated when making such enormous investments.  The city of Madison can clean the lakes and build a public pool at the same time. 

The goal of a cleaner Madison and the construction of a public pool both follow the same environmental commitment to providing people with the safest possible swimming water.  Building a public pool makes sense from an environmental perspective.  Swimmers must be given an alternative to dirty lake water.   

There are so many other opportunities and positive aspects that a public pool can bring to a city.   Young members of the community, especially, will find that a public pool brings beneficial fun, structure, and skills.  Yet, children are not the only people that will benefit from a public pool.  As Petersen put it, “Plain and simple, its cheap, fun entertainment and a great opportunity for families to spend quality time together.”  Also, a pool in the community means that more jobs will be available in the summertime.  These jobs will open the door for young adults/adults to interact with the children in their community and each other.  These people will be able to share their skills and knowledge with others in order to make the community a better place for all.  Most importantly, those who cannot afford to belong to a country club or private pool will finally be able to have access to the trademark summer tradition of swimming.

Giving children access to a pool can change a child’s entire summer.  Many children do not even know how to swim, due to lack of access to a pool.  These children then grow into adults that are not able to swim.  A public pool will allow children to learn the basic skills necessary to swim.  Parents will be able to show, and not just tell, their children how to swim.  Swim lessons led by trained lifeguards may be another option.  Not only will swim lessons give children an extra-curricular activity to add to their already active lifestyles, but also it will help deter children from participating in other activities that are not healthy and/or safe.  Giving children a public facility is an amazing way for them to interact with other kids their own age in a structured and positive environment.  Therefore, parents will be more willing to let their kids take part in recreational activities with the knowledge that these activities are supervised and pro-active. 

Another wonderful aspect that a public pool brings to a community is an abundant amount of summer jobs.  Young adults and adults in need of a summer job may be able to find work at a public pool.  Those people who are skilled in swimming will be able to share their knowledge and skill with others.  They will also have the opportunity to be guardians over those who lack their swimming skills.  In addition to lifeguards and swim instructors, the pool will need someone to manage it, someone to answer phones, possibly snack shop employees, etc.  In the end, there will be many job openings for those in need of summer jobs.  Not only will the employees be making money, they will be afforded the opportunity to work with other members of their city.  By working with others to teach and provide services, these employees will be able to help make the public pool a place where people will want to be.

In terms of swimming in Madison, there are a few different options.  First of all, there are the lakes, which are technically “public” swimming areas.  Yet, throughout much of the summer these lakes are closed and/or unhealthy to swim in.  There are a number of country clubs in Madison, yet these are not affordable for lower income families.  There are also a few indoor facilities that students have available to them.  The problem is, what is available and sanitary for lower-income families to use on a regular basis in the summertime?  The answer is, not much.  A public pool would solve this problem.  With the availability of a public pool, families do not have to run the risk of health problems from the lakes.  A public pool would allow lower-income families to enjoy the recreation of a swimming pool without having to pay the money that it costs to belong to a country club or private pool.  Lower-income families should have a right to this public facility that most good-sized cities have. 

back