Michael Powell
The headline story in the Sentinel's "Extra" section on Sunday, April 17 reported the beginning of the next chapter in the effort of the Boulder Creek Recreation and Park District to build a new "community center at the southern end of the town."
Central to this is the District's effort to secure Proposition 84 funding: Their initial application for that was rejected, and they have now voted to resubmit it with no substantial changes. One board member explained the rationale for the project in terms of the response at public meetings they'd held as follows: "We asked them if they wanted this, and they told us, Yes, we want this, ....'" No mention was made of the fact that only a few had attended those meetings, nor of the fact that "unofficial" public meetings were held in the winter and spring of 2010 in response to news of the application, which were quite well attended, and where the response was much more mixed.
There were supporters of the project at these meetings which I also attended and some of them spoke. The one thing that struck me about what they said was the almost universal invocation of the concept of "Community" capitalization intended: The proposed center would "bring us together as a Community." It was a wonderful example of "Community action," with ample "Community input."
But there was another "community" lack of capitalization intended present, which didn't use that word much, though they did use the word
How is it threatened? Let the Sentinel article begin the explanation: "... almost the entire city block" very near her home is to be dedicated to "a gym, performing arts center and pool." Of course this will mean traffic, since the District hopes for substantial use of the facility.
As for types of use, the District hopes for a greatly enhanced youth program. So, not only will some of that traffic involve young people -- people for whom a car is often a means of expressing exuberance -- but the neighborhood is threatened with the effects of the District's long-standing failings where youth events are concerned: At the existing facility, these have had a way of taking place in the parking lot and surrounding area rather than the facility. One woman spoke of how frightening it had been for her to enter the facility during one of these. A man spoke of the fact that some of the beer bottles from a recent event could, even as he spoke, be found nearby.
So, why, after meeting so much resistance last year, is the District determined to press on with their Proposition 84 application with no changes? The Board member in the article gave time as an excuse: "... the district does not have time to hold public meetings ... ahead of the July 1 deadline" for resubmission. And yet, they have known the initial application was rejected for half a year! As if that weren't weak enough, she gave what may be their bottom line, referring to the $30,000 the board has spent on their proposal: "If we don't resubmit, we've wasted half that money ... . You've already paid these funds, you may as well see it through." Amazing!
Michael Powell is a semi-retired software developer who lives in Boulder Creek.
