The fate of Berkeley's Warm Pool now sits in the hands of Judge Susan Illston.
The Dec. 9 hearing of the Warm Pool lawsuit at U.S. District Court in San Francisco ended inconclusively, as Illston gave little indication whether she intends to grant the request of the plaintiff's lawyers for an injunction to keep the Warm Pool open. At the end of the 40-minute hearing, she said only that she would issue her ruling "shortly" -- which is widely expected to be before Dec. 15, the pool's scheduled closing date. [Update 12/15: by the end of the day, the judge had not ruled. So the game goes into overtime.]
Lawyers for the contending sides -- plaintiff Terry Cochrell versus the City of Berkeley and Berkeley Unified School District -- were subjected to probing questioning by Judge Illston as about 30 Warm Pool users listened from the audience. Wheelchairs clogged the aisles, creating a surreal scene when scores of corporate attorneys from other cases were obligated to wait awkwardly to step around them.
The Berkeley Pools Campaign takes no side in the lawsuit, but from our perspective here are some of the more important takeaways from the hearing:
- Judge Illston seemed concerned about two issues favorable to the defendants: the School District's claim that the Warm Pool building is seismically unsafe, and the possibility that a decision to grant an injunction might lead to an overly broad legal precedent that would force municipalities and school districts around the country to build Warm Pools.
- On the other hand, Illston seemed sympathetic to two claims by plaintiff's attorney Celia McGuinness: that the City's plans for providing disabled programs in the outdoor pools would be worthless "if disabled people can't get in the water because they would get hypothermia," and that the Berkeley YMCA pools are not a valid replacement because none of the pools meets the needs of the disabled for 92-degree deep water.
The previous day, Dec. 8, Scott Ferris, the City's acting director of Parks, Recreation and Waterfront, filed a last-minute brief in support of the defendants. His brief is viewable here, and it details the City's plans for switching programming from the 92-degree, indoor Warm Pool to the City's 81-degree outdoor pools. Following are direct quotes from his brief:
- Arthritis Class (for seniors and disabled): (...) Upon closure of Warm Pool, the City will encourage patrons to participate in a similar class at King Pool, the somewhat misnamed "Senior Exercise Class." In reality, the "Senior Exercise Class" enrollment is approximately 60% disabled patrons, and not all of them are seniors.
- Quiet Swim (for seniors and disabled): (...) Upon closure of Warm Pool, the City intends to open the diving pool at King Pool for this same purpose for approximately 6 hours per week.
- Senior/Disabled Swim (for seniors and disabled): (...) Upon closure of Warm Pool, those patrons can utilize King Pool for lap swim (up to 35 hours per week) and the shallow part of King Pool will be available for many hours as well for those patrons who presently enjoy activities in the shallow end of Warm Pool.
- Spirit Walking/Aqua Chi (for seniors and disabled): (...) Upon closure of Warm Pool, the City intends to offer a "meditation" class in the shallow end of King Pool.
- For several months the City and the Berkeley Y were exploring ways to "partner" upon the closure of Warm Pool, but it was ultimately determined that was unworkable, for logistic and operational reasons.
Comments