by David Mendez

Shoreline is a city of neighborhoods: 14 neighborhoods, spread across 6 miles, spanning Interstate 5 and two state highways. There are two libraries, a handful of commercial hubs, light rail stations, transit stops and too many parks to list.

One thing it doesn’t have is a public pool — not anymore, anyway. And it’s never really had a town center.

Proposition 1, if approved by voters in the Nov. 3 general election, might change both of those facts.

Prop. 1 is intended to fund a replacement for the city’s previous pool, which closed for good in 2020 at nearly 50 years old. It’s Shoreline’s second attempt to finance a pool in the last 10 years, and city leaders are hoping that voters will accept that it’s smaller in scope than the previous plan. The construction plan leaves room for the city to build out the property with another community space, like a park or a new recreation center, at a place reasonably accessible from all across the city. If all goes according to plan, it would mean a new civic center and hub of activity to draw folks to Shoreline.

The problem is the price tag, and the property tax that would follow. Shoreline plans to finance $100 million to get the job done, including paying off the debt on the land, completing the aquatic center’s design, then building the whole thing. But the property tax wouldn’t end when the center is built; it’s expected to last in perpetuity — or at least until its funding mechanism, a metropolitan park district, is dissolved.

Some opponents to the proposition say they’d be OK with the pool if it simply cost less. But supporters worry that this may be the city’s last bite at the apple.

“My personal opinion is, I think the city’s done a lot of work. And I think this is our shot,” said Susie McDowell, a pool proponent and long-time local high school swim coach. “If it doesn’t happen, it’s not happening.”

The old Shoreline Pool opened in 1971, built with money from a 1967 King County parks bond. The pool, built on land owned by the Shoreline School District and initially run by King County, was well-loved and well-used. The district’s three high schools — the now-closed Shoreline High School, as well as today’s Shorewood and Shorecrest high schools — sent their swimmers to the pool for practice and competitions. But it also was a recreation space, an exercise space and a place for folks to change their lives.

Seattle Times and Seattle Post-Intelligencer archives show peeks into life around the old pool: notices of swim classes, meet results, and profiles of folks like Jim Longmuir, an Innis Arden resident who at 68 years old reckoned himself the “oldest living lifeguard in the Northwest.” There were stories of widows learning to overcome their fear of swimming, of octogenarians trying competitive swimming for the first time and of families repaying debts to the owners of overzealous poolside candy machines.

After the City of Shoreline incorporated in 1995, King County transferred ownership of the pool. But by the 2010s, frequent closures and maintenance issues forced Shoreline leaders to reconsider the pool. In 2015, the city approved $750,000 for a “long-term maintenance project” that would keep the pool running until 2022. But the facility’s age meant parts were vanishingly rare, and that portions of the facility would need to be demolished and rebuilt to modern standards. All the while, costs ticked up.

“If we are continuing to exceed our budgeted dollars for the pool…I think we as a council should have a larger discussion about, should those repairs continue?” Councilmember Chris Roberts said during an Oct. 2019 meeting.

That year, Shoreline placed a pool and parks bond measure on the ballot, seeking to raise $103.6 million to build the Shoreline Aquatics, Recreation and Community Center. The project would have built a new pool at the heart of a community center, as well as a gym, walking track, exercise studios and a commercial kitchen. It also would have set up park improvements across the city, and replaced the Spartan Recreation Center, which itself was more than 70 years old at the time. That bond would have cost residents an additional $0.056 per $1,000 of annual appraised value onto their property taxes — meaning that homes valued at $1 million would have $560 added to their annual tax bill.

Letters to Shoreline Area News marked a fierce divide, with some opponents accusing the facility of being a “pet project of the high school swim team,” while others demanded the project include amenities that “benefit everyone” — like a lazy river, sauna, hot tubs and waterslides. Others insisted that the taxes were too high a burden to place on seniors.

Ultimately, that measure failed. Though it won 54% of the vote, it missed the 60% approval threshold required for municipal levies, as set by state law. The city was forced to regroup. In 2020, even though the measure failed, Shoreline spent $17 million to buy a self-storage facility at 17828 Midvale Avenue, just north of City Hall, with the goal of turning the lot’s 183,000 square feet into a new aquatic center. Then it started planning for that future.

In Sept. 2025, Shoreline tasked a Pool Facility Advisory Committee with determining how the city should place a funding measure on the 2026 ballot. After five months and seven meetings, the 17 members of the Pool Committee unanimously supported creating a ballot measure to form a Metropolitan Park District — a special tax district that, like a school or fire district, can levy a tax on properties in its area. And their recommendation urged action.

“The Committee noted that further delay would increase the overall cost. With the 2020 closure of the Shoreline Pool, there is no public pool in the city,” read the committee’s recommendation. “The Committee believes a pool is an important and necessary investment for future generations and that a public pool should be a standard amenity for a city of Shoreline’s size.”

That amenity would be generous. A preliminary design indicates a competition-capable lane pool with diving boards, a leisure pool with a lazy river and a handful of water features, a hydrotherapy pool and sauna, and spaces for a snack bar, parties, classrooms and spectator areas — seemingly designed to satisfy folks seeking a pool that may “benefit everyone.”

Generally speaking, MPD’s have the power to permanently levy taxes on the properties within its boundaries — in this case, Shoreline city limits. They’re also only allowed to spend money on specific, publicly-stated uses. In this case, that’s for building, operating and maintaining a pool facility, as well as potential future recreation facilities. Per the City of Shoreline, the first 20 years of revenues collected by the MPD’s tax would go to paying off the debt for building the pool facility. After that, the revenue may then be used to pay for a rec center or pool renovations. 

The committee found that creating the tax district allowed Shoreline to get more done in one swoop: by law, the funds raised by a metropolitan park district can be used both for paying construction costs and ongoing maintenance and operation costs. Other options, like a floating a bond measure or a levy lid lift, could pay off building expenses or cover ongoing costs. Neither could do both.

“It’s a smart solution for funding it,” McDowell, who sat on the pool committee, said. “There’s going to come things that you don’t want coming out of the city’s budget, so it’s a separate thing.”

It also just so happens that forming an MPD requires only a simple, 50% majority to pass — rather than the 60% supermajority that bond measures require. “I think that’s a bonus to ‘pro’ people,” McDowell noted.

The City of Shoreline has publicly stated that it plans to finance $100 million for the pool, based on its projected tax revenues. The city is seeking to raise $8.8 million annually through the tax to service debts for the pool. To get there, they anticipate a levy rate of $0.55 per $1,000 of a property’s assessed value — or adding $550 to the property tax bill of a $1 million home.

Should the proposition pass, the MPD would begin collecting tax dollars in Jan. 2028.

Of the $100 million Shoreline plans to finance, the city estimates that $61.2 million would go to construction, $22.2 million would go toward softs costs, like design and permitting, and $16.6 would go toward paying remaining costs on the land. The city is also expecting to receive a one-time $5 million grant set aside from a King County Parks Levy.

As for the City and the MPD, the leadership would be somewhat indistinguishable. Per state law, an MPD confined to one jurisdiction may be governed by the legislative authority of that jurisdiction — in this case, the Shoreline City Council.

Opponents to the proposition have called foul on public support that Shoreline’s politicians have had for the measure, feeling that officials like Mayor Betsy Robertson — who has actively supported Prop. 1 and the Let Shoreline Swim campaign — should remain neutral on the matter. 

“It feels a little bit like a David and Goliath thing here, frankly,” said Jeff Bates, the sole listed contact of Citizens for Shoreline, a committee formed to oppose Prop. 1.

“Everyone that I’ve talked to that is opposed to this particular Proposition 1 initiative has said that they are not anti-pool. I think everyone says yes, a replacement pool would be in order for the city, which would mean a new eight-lane, 25 meter swimming pool with associated support facilities, locker room, yada yada,” Bates told The Osprey. “People aren’t against the pool. I think we are against $100 million for the facility, which is really a new aquatic center that goes way beyond replacing the facility that was destroyed back in 2021 — you know, only a few years ago.”

This, Bates said, is the first time he’s ever gotten involved in organizing a political campaign. “It’ll probably be my last, frankly,” he added. His committee came together in the comments of a Facebook post discussing Prop. 1, he said, and grew from there.

“This isn’t my cup of tea. I never intended to be a guy out there making signs or forming political action committees,” Bates said. He’s a relatively-new resident of Shoreline, moving from Seattle to find a less-expensive place to live, so he wasn’t around to vote on the 2019 pool proposition.

“But the $110 million wasn’t all about a pool. It was more, and that’s where a lot of the people who voted last time are frustrated,” he said. “This is $100 million, and we don’t get anything else. We get a pool, but we don’t get a recreation center, we don’t get other stuff that was in the last proposal. In some respects, people are thinking the last proposal was a little more diverse in terms of the uses it provided.”

The cost, Bates said, is his biggest issue. “I truly think if they would have gone and just asked for a replacement pool, something in the order of a $30-to-35 million project, versus a $60-to-61 million project…I think it would have passed quite easily,” he said. He cited an opinion article written by KIRO morning show host Charlie Harger, who argued that a $35 million price tag for a YMCA pool in Sumner as evidence that Shoreline wants too much money for its own pool.

But the Sumner pool was built in 2015. As Harger noted, in the 11 years since, the cost of construction nationwide has nearly doubled, according to a Non-residential Construction Cost Index maintained by Mortenson Construction, a national construction firm that’s built hundreds of sports and entertainment venues across the country, including redevelopment of Climate Pledge Arena. The cost of construction in Seattle has outpaced the national index over that same time, as well.

By that measure, the city’s $61.2 million building cost estimate — $100 million minus the estimated cost of planning — tracks with the modern cost of building that YMCA facility today.

“If it doesn’t pass, I think it’s a sign that maybe the people that put this together should have been a little more measured and thoughtful, as far as the ask,” Bates said.

Joseph Smith, a longtime Shoreline resident, is more concerned about the financial risk to the city. Smith is one of the signatories to the ballot argument against Prop. 1, and is worried about the effects the pool will have on the city’s finances going forward.

“There’s significant headwinds,” Smith said. “The city actually thinks they’re going to be running a deficit here in the very near future, and if that’s the case, I’ve no understanding of why a project of this scope would make sense.”

The city’s 10-year budget forecast projects that Shoreline will end budgets with annual deficits starting in 2029. “New revenue options, levy lid lift and use of fund balance or service (cost) reductions would be required to address the deficit,” said a report included in the proposed 2027-2028 biennial budget.

“There are so many people that think that pools are going to be moneymakers, and they’re not,” Smith said. “Yes, it’s a facility for residents, but it’s a huge financial risk…does the city really need to be in the pool business?”

Smith also argued that the city’s estimated drop-in user fees ($9 for resident adults, $11 for non-residents, with discounts for youth and seniors) would price out folks on fixed incomes. For its part, the city has already stated that “scholarships would also be available” for users.

Bates said his committee hasn’t raised much money — just enough to pay for a few dozen yard signs, which he said he’s running low on. It’s not clear exactly how much was spent, or precisely who paid for it; Citizens for Shoreline is a “mini-reporting” committee, according to its Public Disclosure Commission filings. Mini-reporting committees do not expect to raise more than $7,000 overall or more than $500 from any one person, and thus aren’t required to file expenditure or contribution reports. Other associates of the committee, Bates said, declined to speak with The Osprey, fearing possible professional or social blowback.

“There’s that old saying, you can’t fight city hall, you know? I think the city wants it, council wants it, a lot of people want it,” Bates said. “All you can do is try a little bit.”

For their part, the folks within City Hall are hoping that this try will be the one that wins voters over.

Ask Mayor Betsy Robertson how she’s feeling, and she’ll be frank: she’s nervous. “I think I’ve felt that way every single election since I got into this world,” she said after the Oct. 26 Shoreline City Council meeting. The temperature of the debates, she said, is bothering her most.

“It’s just so ugly. It just feels so negative, and I feel that a lot of the arguments are not…” she hesitated, then called back to the night’s meeting. “This idea that we could have maintained the old pool — you heard the conversation about Spartan Rec tonight.”

Earlier, during discussions of the upcoming city budget, the council discussed needed repairs to Spartan Recreation Center, the school district-owned, city-controlled gym and community center, which stands in constant need of repair.

A snapshot of Shoreline’s facility major maintenance fund included in the city’s upcoming budget shows about $985,000 set aside for repairs to Spartan Rec between 2025 and 2029 — and that doesn’t include an expected $250,000 to $300,000 in unfunded maintenance projects. And Spartan Rec, like the Shoreline Pool before it, sits on land owned by the Shoreline School District.

In the city’s current agreement with the school district, the two entities pledged to share costs on the building.

“Right now, their funding is not what it needs to be, to be able to help us support this,” said Nick Borer, a parks department facilities manager. The city wants to keep running dance, exercise and recreation programs out of Spartan Rec, but the building needs repairs.

“I’m frustrated with the state of that facility,” Councilmember Keith Scully said. “We’re patching up a facility that is long past its prime.”

Robertson, speaking after the meeting, agreed. “The school district is not in a position to help. They’re not in a position to pull the trigger, one way or another, on the future of that space. So we’re just kind of limping along, keeping it alive. A city like ours needs a community center, and one of these days that one is not going to be available to us.”

When the city controls the land its facilities are built on, it better controls its own destiny, Robertson said. Building the pool on city-owned land, she said, opens the door for a rec center to be on the same property as the pool, if Prop. 1 passes. It opens the door for Shoreline to create a central gathering space in an area that’s near two of the city’s most-trafficked major roads, near public transit and the Interurban Trail. In many ways, she said, the location really is ideal.

What’s not ideal, critics say, is the property tax hit that landowners are facing.

“Which is fair. I wish there was another funding mechanism available, I truly do,” Robertson said. Talks with potential local and regional partners to share in the costs to the facility didn’t bear fruit. “Yes, we talked to the school district. Yes, we talked to Lake Forest Park. Yes, we talked to Edmonds and Snohomish County, and King County is supporting us with $5 million, and [we talked to] Mountlake Terrace. And guess what? Everybody wants, if they’re going to invest in a facility, to have it in their city.”

In other words, there’s no time like the present.

“We have a piece of property, we have a vision, and construction costs are only going to get higher and higher and higher,” Robertson said. “That’s one thing we can project with certainty.”

“I do understand the cost issue…but I just know that yeah, this is going to get worse,” said Susie McDowell. “If it doesn’t happen, it’s not happening, in my opinion, because the last time the whole thing was $100 million. Now, this time, it’s just the pool and aquatics. I understand the cost, but to me, the cost is worth it.”

McDowell is a lifelong swimmer and competitor. She competed on the University of Washington’s swim team for four years, then joined the coaching staff at Shorewood High School in 1989, directly out of college. She became head coach in 1997, sticking around until 2022, when she hung up her whistle for good.

When the Shoreline Pool closed in 2020, the local high school teams were effectively left without a home of their own — so they started renting. Since then, they’ve squeezed training hours in at Innis Arden Swim Club, an outdoor private pool maintained by the Innis Arden Homeowners Association.

“They really helped us out by continuing to stay open year-round when we didn’t have a place,” McDowell said. “I don’t think it’s a long-term solution to be outdoors…the boys team can’t host meets because, you know, do you want to come swim when there might be snow on the ground when you could be inside at a nice aquatic center?”

Swimming, McDowell said, isn’t just recreation, but a life skill and a matter of safety. An aquatic center is another place for children and families to go, providing a third place for people to live their lives outside of home, work or school. 

That desire to build something for the greater good is part of what’s driving Robertson to advocate for the pool outside of her mayoral duties. “I don’t only care about the city between 7 and 9 on Monday nights. This is my life,” she said. She cares about what happens in Shoreline, about the people here today and the people who will move here, and she wants the city to have what its residents will want and need to build the community they deserve.

“These are building blocks,” Robertson said. “This is a major, major one, of course. But the future — a future with a pool, a future with this facility — I think is a bright one for us.”

King County has three ballot drop boxes in Shoreline:

Ballots are due Nov. 3, and polls close at 8 p.m. You can also find a complete list of King County ballot drop boxes at KingCounty.gov.