George Wallace wrote a detailed comment to the “Homeowners still angry over cities dog park decision” post. Here is George’s comment copied to a regular post.
by George Wallace
At the meeting The Mayor effectively demonstrated his ability to do what he thinks is best for our community irrespective of public input.
The 2-3 hours of discussion by about 50 residents at the special council meeting in January was shown to be a complete waste of the residents? time. The underlying assumption of that meeting was clearly that once a suitable new location was found for the dog park, the existing park would be closed. Any assertion to the contrary is misleading at best (although there was also considerable discussion of the option to leave the park as it is). At no time was the need for two dog parks ever discussed. In fact, serious consideration was given at that time to closing the existing park at a set date to coincide with the report detailing the possibility for the new park location.
In spite of that, The Mayor led the discussion at the city council meeting in a way that attempted to preclude discussion on the real question at hand (when and how to close the existing park) and in fact moved on to the next agenda item in a hurried manner. Moreover, he had to be called upon to re-open the old business of the dog park to continue the discussion. He was reluctant to make what discussion did take place part of the public record in the form of a motion that reflected his actions.
By his actions, The Mayor effectively disenfranchised all the residents who had input into the previous special session and demonstrated a typical political maneuver: wait until the opposition to your plan is not present to act in your interests.
Anyone reading this should not be nearly as concerned about the specific issue of the dog park as they should be about the manner in which The Mayor proceeded to do what he wanted in spite of the substantial public input to the contrary.
Take a look around at any green space you may have near your home and realize that he could just as easily decide to put a city facility there. We do need more lighted tennis courts here, don?t we? Or maybe a basket ball park?