Residents split over aquatic center and tax proposal; commenters urge swim access and salary audits

Public comment at the June 11 Johnson City Commission meeting featured divergent views on a proposed property tax increase and a planned aquatic center, with speakers alternating between calls for more recreational investment and demands for fiscal restraint and transparency.

Randy Keebler said neighborhood policing is inadequate in parts of the city, citing slow response times in Wing Deer and vehicle thefts, and asked why taxes should rise when some public-safety needs remain unmet: “So why would you increase taxes when you can't take care of what you got?”

Mary Ne, a Johnson City resident of more than two decades, urged commissioners to view the proposal as an investment, saying the city has benefited from past revitalization projects and that “Johnson City needs better pool facilities for the size of this town.” She asked the commission not to frame the tax increase as only about the pool but as part of broader planning.

Hannah Pogue criticized Parks and Recreation’s equity and access, said many families cannot afford privatized club sports (she estimated roughly $250 per child for upper-tier programs), and raised numerical claims about proposed pay and budget percentages. She suggested several actions including removing the pool from the budget, auditing public salaries and middle management, and reviewing vehicle and equipment expenditures.

Felicia Lash, a parent and Liberty Bell Middle School teacher, described aquatics programs as life‑saving and said formal swim lessons reduce drowning risk; she urged funding to expand access and said Memorial Park pools are overwhelmed.

David (Dave) Adams called for more transparent public deliberation on the budget after reviewing short prior hearings, saying brief hearings deprived the public of informed participation. Chris Karacio (coach and Science Hill team doctor) supported a modest property-tax increase for an aquatic center and urged commissioners not to cede the decision to a politically motivated referendum championed, he said, by a county Republican chair.

Speakers used both data and personal experience to press opposing views. Several requested audits and clearer budget lines; at least one commenter recommended moving aquatic center debt service into a Parks and Recreation capital account for future readings. Commissioners heard the comments and said they would consider amendments at the third reading.

No formal decisions on the pool’s funding structure or salary changes were made at the June 11 session; those items will remain under consideration ahead of the June 25 final reading.