To the Editor:

John Day residents came together to fund construction of Gleason Pool more than 64 years ago — doing so under extraordinary circumstances: The city’s population was small (approximately 1,573) and the U.S. was in a recession (a.k.a. the Eisenhower Recession), the most significant recession during the post-WWII era, triggered largely by the Asian flu epidemic that killed about 80,000 Americans and resulted in severely diminished labor supply and decelerated production. Inflation-curbing measures in effect weakened demand for commodities and raw materials, causing a sharp dive in U.S. exports thereby widening the country’s trade deficit and intensifying the recession. Further, unemployment was substantial, especially in commodity industries such as mining and timber.

Given the extraordinary economic conditions to which no one was impervious, were these people selfish? Motivated by feelings rather than thoughtful analysis? Indifferent to the challenges facing friends and neighbors? Blinded by want versus need? Irresponsible spenders?

I don’t believe so; neither do I give credence to parallel words spouted today by some attempting to diminish fellow citizens holding different views.

Despite undeniably uncertain times, community forebears rallied to support the promise of their community and its people by investing in a new facility that promoted safety, healthy recreation, economic benefit, and community cohesion. Evidenced by countless testimonials reflecting positive ways residents were impacted by their Gleason Pool experiences, one can reasonably discern that the foresight and conviction demonstrated by previous residents have paid off handsomely for more than six decades.

History offers valuable lessons, not the least of which being to spotlight clarity on current events. In solidarity with the stalwart citizens of the past, today’s voters have opportunity to carry on the torch lit long ago by voting in favor of an updated version of Gleason Pool:

• Six swim lanes.

• Legally required adaptations rendering the facility accessible to patrons of all physical abilities.

• Changing rooms to accommodate reasonable modesty needs.

• Administrative space.

• A rentable multipurpose room.

• Design adaptation that would cost-effectively permit future enclosure should local conditions favor building an indoor swimming facility.

Please join me in voting “yes” on the swim bond.

Liz Aleman

John Day