Foss Waterway Park Workshop on Feb. 19th
The Foss Waterway Development Authority is hosting the second of two workshops for the development of a park concept plan on the eastside of the Foss at the head of the Waterway. The first one was packed.
Have you joined the discussion?
Where and When
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
5:30 pm to 7:00 pm
Freighthouse Square, Phoenix Room
430 East 25th St
Filed under: waterfront, parks
2 comments
W Weyland Duir February 15, 2008
For those that left the last meeting frustrated and disenfranchised by their experiences, PLEASE give the public process one more chance. The problems that hampered the first workshop have been thoroughly researched and addressed. If you value parks, open space, kayaking, or rowing, your participation is critical to protect our Community’s investment.
WD
J Jean McCord February 16, 2008
I and many others are concerned about and disgusted with the tactics on display at the January 29 Waterway Park meeting, and I know steps are being taken to ensure that the process is more fair for the February 19 meeting.
At the previous meeting, each table was to set four priorities to present to the entire gathering. Three of the 12 people at my table strongly favored siting the Children’s Museum in Waterway Park, three strongly opposed it, and six wanted boating and didn’t care either way about the museum. Each person had four votes, and 10 people cast votes for their different choices. Two proponents cast all four votes for the museum, which thus had nine votes and was the last priority, pushing out “Open space,” which received seven honest votes.
Obviously the two who “stuffed the ballot box” thought their opinions worth more than those of the other nine. Only three people wanted the museum in Waterway Park, yet our table’s report falsely made it appear a priority for nine of the 12 people.
From contacts with others at the meeting, I learned that the same “ballot-box stuffing” occurred at other tables. In addition, several museum proponents did not accept the random table assignments, but “redistributed” themselves as they pleased so they could have more impact. They also took over the recording and reporting functions at several tables and skewed what was reported to favor the museum.
Conservation Futures awarded the money to purchase the land for certain specific uses—primarily open space and nonmotorized boating. There’s barely enough land for those purposes as is, and allowing the museum to ignore the covenant with Conservation Futures—especially by such dishonest tactics—definitely does not keep the faith with boaters, open-space advocates, and those who want a trail that goes all the way from Waterway Park to Point Defiance.
A few zealots are attempting to force the museum and its parking on that small site—in addition to nonmotorized boating amenities, open space, and paths. These tactics subvert Conservation Futures’ reasons for granting funding to purchase the site as well as the process by which members of the public can make their wishes known. There are better places for the museum, ones that the museum should work to obtain by fair means.
Is this a suitable lesson for the children?