Yesterday we went to the pool. Yes it was cool and breezy. No I did not go in the water. Yes the children did.
Here's the really funny part.
As we signed in, the pol manager for this year informed us of the new "rule" this year (from the brilliant minds at our HOA, don't even get me started). She very nicely explained to me that any children under 13 had to be within "arm's reach" at all times. Mind you, for me that is six people, including my four oldest who all passed the swim test. I looked at her, I looked at the children, looked back at her. I suppose the look on my face said it all. She went on to say, "Yeah, well, I know that might be little difficult for you, but um, that's the rule." If I were a little braver I would have said what immediately came to my mind, which was to ask if they had forgotten how to train the lifeguards how to save people this year.
This "rule" means that I cannot go to the baby pool with 18 month old and four year old while my big kids swim. If yesterday was any indication, the expect me to run around the big pool, chasing the 18 month old while simultaneously trying to keep five other people in arm's reach. How that is any safer is beyond me and it seems along with all my other "mom" skills I'm expected to grow at least six more elastic arms if I want to enjoy the pool this summer. A pool, by the way, that we pay for every month with our HOA fees.
But here's the best part. Since I live across the street, today, as more people went to the pool for the first time this season I get to watch (and sometimes hear) the outrage of my fellow neighbors at the silliness of it all. Let's just say, people are ticked.
5 comments:
We had that rule at Saratoga once upon a time. But I think it it was limited to the shallow area. If you had a child in the shallow area, you had to be in arm's reach.We rarely enforced it--it was ridiculous. But we were also hyper-vigilant and I don't see that in lifeguards these days. I almost jumped in yesterday to get someone else's kid while the lifeguard looked at me in wonder. I'm pretty sure he is the same one who was asleep in the stand last year. It makes no sense if a child has passed the swim test--what's the test for anyway? Let the ticked people voice their frustration, but don't count on reason to prevail. It's all about litigation anyway. If anything happens and the parent wasn't in arm's reach, the pool management is now covered. No one wants responsibility...
Wow! That is rediculous! We had an HOA at our old house and had MANY problems with them. But the way our pool worked was that the kids got a certain pass color if they passed the swim test and were over 12. Those kids were allowed to go to the pool daily without a parent. But never did we have to have all children under 13 in arms reach! I feel for you, Maria. And I, too, don't get the point of having the kids pass a swim test?! And what are the lifeguards for? Hopefully enough people will be mad about this and show up for an HOA meeting to voice their frustration.
Stinky HOA! That is a dumb rule! Just ignore it!
Lilly
i don't think i would have had the restraint to NOT say that for what were the lifeguards getting paid.
pool rules. maybe that one's more like a "guideline". like booster seat guidelines that would almost make ME have to sit in a booster seat in the car.
Yeah... We kind of ignore it though! But it still sucks! >=(
This is what I say to the HOA: =P
Post a Comment