Saturday, June 2, 2007

Article in Today's News

The Ann Arbor News published an article today about the continuing saga of city obstruction to a dog run. They even included a link to us! If this is your first time visiting our blog, please take a look at some previous posts, there is a lot of background information here.

It's a nice article that captures the basic outlines of our situation. One of the things that Jayne Miller of the Parks Department is quoted as saying in the article is that "neighbors don't want [a dog run]." Although there certainly is opposition, I don't think that's a fully accurate statement. There were approximately four people (out of 40) at the first Ward Park planning meeting who voiced opposition to the plan. Of them, one didn't live in the neighborhood and at least one wasn't outright opposed to a dog run, he just wanted to make sure that it wouldn't cause problems if it went ahead.

Further, it is my understanding that previous plans have gained neighbor support. Swift Run for example has general support and South Maple Park had a series of positive public meetings but was nixed by the Utilities department who wants to put a water tower on the site eventually.

There will always be some people in opposition to any project. The dog run program is clearly one that draws vocal opposition, but it also has a huge amount of support. At all of the planning meetings, opponents have been outnumbered by supporters many times over. The city itself has identified this as a major need in the Pros Plan, the Dog Park task force report of 1998, and public discussion on the recent millage that was passed.

As Glenn pointed out in response to a previous post, the city is going ahead with a million dollar rennovation at the city market that essentially amounts to moving some trees and building a gazebo that many people have opposed. I think it's just as fair to say that Market patrons and neighbors "don't want" the gazebo, and yet there is $1,000,000 for it? How does that square?

There is a lot more in the article that I'll get to later. I'm fuming a bit right now over several things. The stories from Parks and Rec on several fronts seem to change every time I hear from them. There is no good reason that there isn't a dog run open yet except that we aren't considered an important constituency. Voices of opponents to these plans have been given far more weight by the city than those in favor, but don't we pay the same property taxes?

For now, take a read and don't hesitate to send your reaction to City Council, Parks and Rec, PAC, or The News as a letter to the editor.

No comments: