Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

SPRINKER: Is county seeking a buyer?

Letter by Jeff Scott, Graham on July 6, 2010 at 11:39 am with 4 Comments »
July 6, 2010 11:39 am

Rumors have started to spread. One makes sense: The Sprinker Recreation Center will soon be condemned.

If the county is not going to rebuild, will the ailing structure sit vacant? That makes little sense.

Not long ago Lowe’s wanted to purchase the property adjacent to the recreation center. It is my belief that this is the future of Sprinker. If this happens, little will be unaffected at the facility. The ballfields will have to be removed, the skate park filled in, tennis center closed and forest impacted beyond belief.

The county has told the public that the facility was constructed without permits in 1976. This is not true. The facility was constructed with permits. In fact two of three recent engineering reports list minor damage with the roof.

The county’s report is the only one that condemns the building. Great, so replace the roof and keep the money coming into the system. Every public skate averages 200 skaters, each paying $7. This is currently done nine times a week.

It makes sense to keep the building open, unless the county has a buyer waiting in the wings. In 2004, the cost to replace the entire structure was $8 million; in 2005 it was $11 million. Now it’s $34 million. A levy will be put to the voters this fall because the County Council knows it will fail, clearing the land for sale.

Leave a comment Comments → 4
  1. Great letter Jeff. Regrettably, it seems that the county is more concerned with creating more tax revenue to support the overloaded bureaucracy at the county building than providing a decent recreational facility for people to go to. I’ve been a critic of Pierce County politics for many years and have learned to always expect the worse from them. Money talks and B>S> walks!

  2. tractorneighbor says:

    Check your facts. Most if not all county parks properties are deeded as property to only be used as parks (Public recreation lands). In other words it couldn’t be sold to a commercial entity, ever.

  3. Loren_Zimmerman says:

    Well I see a comment to Jeff’s letter; “it couldnt be sold to a commercial entity, ever. One of the most important things I have learned in my well traveled life is this….”NEVER”…say “ever”. What tangled webs we weave when huge money is on the line.

  4. pnwtennis says:

    Does anyone remember back about 6-7 years ago when Rite-Aid wanted to bye the Hwy 7/Military Rd corner of Spanaway Lake Golf Course? The County was considering it, however golfers went ballistic at the idea and the possible sale was dropped. If they really wanted to sell/trade property, they would/could do it. As evidenced by the fact that citizens desperately opposed the Chambers Bay Golf Course, but it’s certainly a reality now!

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0