Letter to the Editor: A public process resulted in Shoreline Prop 1
Tuesday, October 22, 2019
This letter is written in response to Jeannette Paulson's letter. I would like to provide the facts around the public process that resulted in Shoreline Prop 1. The process was completely transparent and all residents were encouraged to participate. I was a member of the Parks Funding Advisory Committee so I have some insight into the public process.
In August 2018, over 800 people provided input on the Community and Aquatics center through idea boards posted at Celebrate Shoreline, the Spartan Gym and Swinging Summer's Eve. The most popular ideas included play structures and slides in an aquatic center, indoor walking track, natural daylight, swim lessons, lap swimming and ground spray.
In September 2018, frequent users of the pool and Spartan Gym were invited to dialogue with staff, Park Board Members, and consultants to provide feedback on the concept design. Over 40 citizens participated in this discussion.
At the same time, the Parks Funding Advisory Committee was formed to explore funding options and review park projects for prioritization. The opportunity to serve on the committee was open to everyone. The actual appointments were made by the City Manager, not for the purpose of excluding anyone but because the work required a manageable number of people.
The Park Funding Advisory Committee was made up of a diverse group of people, young and old, from different backgrounds and financial status. The committee included a fair number of retirees on fixed incomes and their voices were heard. We understood there were financial constraints to consider. The choice of which parks and features to recommend wasn't easy but that was our charge and that's what we did.
At each meeting, the agenda was posted on the website and after the meetings minutes were posted as well. There was nothing secretive or exclusionary at all. Mostly it was long winter nights with people rushing from work to City Hall to participate in helping their community envision a Community and Aquatics center and maintain and enhance our well-loved parks.
I take umbrage at the claim that the City conspired in any way to exclude citizens from the discussion and decision to move forward with this measure. It is simply not true.
Finally, Prop 1 is an example of what we need our city to do. Our community will never have a public pool, community center and well-maintained parks without a local government that has the vision to make it happen. I support Prop 1 because I believe our community will benefit in innumerable ways from this project.
Joan Herrick
Shoreline
Posts
4 comments:
I'm still voting NO. $103,000,000 is to much money for a pool with some feel-good-but-too-little park joojoo thrown in. We're not all Amazon employees who have the luxury to spend $300+ extra a year for this. You might not value tax dollars and others' savings, but I do. VOTE NO!
"Finally, Prop 1 is an example of what we need our city to do." No, what we need our city to do is effectively manage our existing resources and deliver on promises already made. Come back to us with a request for money in a couple of years, when you’ve shown that you can deliver on the sidewalk maintenance and improvements that we voted on last year and secured an off-leash park for the east-side.
I consider myself green. I traded in my pickup truck for a Leaf. I take mass transit. So if the pool is a the source of greenhouse gasses, why don't we just give it up? We don't need a pool. How can we expect people to make ethical personal choices that benefit the environment if local governments don't lead by example? Construction itself contributes several years of greenhouse gasses from the get go.
No one has been able to answer the questions about what kind of carbon foot print this facility will have. Are the "built green" standards required or is that just for the unwashed masses?
Post a Comment