Council Delays Southeast Area Park Plan

I was optimistic after a few good steps that I actually thought the city had made dog owners a priority. But now I realize that I was fooling myself. City Council has once again delayed the Southeast Area Park off-leash area plan. I had originally been told that they were planning to hear it at the meeting next Monday (the 16th). But when I checked the meeting agenda on the city's website yesterday, it was nowhere to be found. So I did some checking and now I'm told that Council will not hear the plan until August 6.

You will remember that the public meeting for Southeast Area Park was June 16 and that we were told at the time that the only thing left keeping work from beginning was City Council approval. It is just ridiculous that this should have to wait more than a month and a half to even be considered by the City Council. They have broken a series of public promises about opening a dog park, they know that we are frustrated, this plan was supposed to provide temporary relief until a more permanent plan could be put in place. But it is clear now that they don't really care about dog owners and they don't care about the broken promises.

One other point bears remembering right now. The only reason that Council has to give its approval for this plan is that they insisted on that as a condition for passing the off-leash ordinance change. The ordinance resolution that PAC forwarded to Council allowed Parks staff to make the final approval decisions. This is how most other facilities are approved in city parks. In its reading at Council however, it they decided to change it so that they could have the last say.

I understand that some people have anxiety about dog parks, even if it is misplaced. But by inserting themselves into the process, City Council has added an extra layer of bureaucracy. Thus I believe that they brought a responsibility upon themselves to make sure that this extra layer doesn't translate into serious delays. They have not lived up to that responsibility. Rather they have already let it cause at least a month and a half delay in a project that was supposed to quickly relieve pressure caused by the city's previous delays and broken promises.

At the council meeting where the ordinance change had its first reading I addressed council. Among other things I asked them to become pro-active supporters of dog-owning taxpayers once the resolution was passed. I let them know that we feel neglected and barely tolerated and that we need our elected representatives to actively represent our needs. In their discussions it was clear that they believe they are doing all they can for us and don't see how they could help any more. They could help by taking seriously the responsibilities of being the final arbiter of dog run projects. That would mean actively bringing them to the table for approval and not allowing the extra hurdle that they created to cause serious delays.

Remember this when you speak with Council Members or candidates for local office and remember this when you vote in the local elections this fall.