 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
SAVE CENTRAL PARK NEWS: DOWNLOAD THE FLYER: HB Election Information Upcoming City Council Meetings prior to Election Day: We need your support! Please come and show your support at the next City Council meeting on: Please consider speaking, as these are the last opportunities for public comments on the issue prior to November 7th. |
|
|
 |
| WELCOME TO SAVE CENTRAL PARK.ORG |
Email us today to find out more at: savecentralpark@socal.rr.com MISSION STATEMENT: ARGUMENT AGAINST MEASURE T First, how can you, the voter, be expected to approve a project for which you have only vague details. The last time the public was asked to vote blindly on a project was the sports complex where you were told the cost would be $1.5 million but the project ballooned to $19 million, half of which was for the remediation of contaminated soils. Second, the City’s proposal to pay for this project will divert $22 million from other park needs to one single grandiose 47,000 square foot “Palace in the Park”. This means that decades-long promises of park improvements throughout the city will be delayed indefinitely including completion of Irby and Bartlett Parks, handicapped compliant restrooms for Central Park, rehabilitation of community facilities, and fully funding beach maintenance to name just a few. Costs don’t end once the building is built. Operations and maintenance are an on-going challenge and a yearly fiscal drain to our General Fund. The General Fund is what pays for public safety and maintenance of our aging infrastructure. While there is a need for increasing senior services, all our residents deserve well-maintained streets, sidewalks, parks, sewers, beaches and libraries. And finally, will the siege on our public open space ever end? We have seen countless proposals over the years to commercialize Central Park: restaurants, golf courses, motorcross, bungee jumping, and hotels. The public has rebuffed these proposals time and time again in favor of picnics, nature, and solitude. We urge you to reject this proposal. Debbie Cook Grace Winchell John Scott Flossie Horgan _________________________________________________________________________ REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE T Are you satisfied with the condition of our community’s infrastructure? Do you want Central Park diminished by more commercial development. If not, then vote NO on Measure T. Would you have liked more information about this proposal before you were asked to vote? Here are a few facts. 1. The consultant estimated the 45,000 square foot facility will cost $23 million – money that will be diverted from other park needs. 2. The plan to offset the costs of operations is to rent out the facility. 3. You are not being asked whether you would prefer any of the other non-park locations studied. Would you like to know whether the City can afford this project? In 1998, the City of Huntington Beach formed a 56-member citizen committee to review and assess the deteriorating condition of our infrastructure. After three years of investigation, their conclusion: $849 million in unfunded needs. Streets, parks, harbor, libraries, landscape medians, flood channels, beaches, sewers, fire stations, block walls, sidewalks, trees, community centers, and yes, even the senior center, were all in need of repair or replacement. To address the diverse needs of the community, a more frugal alternative must be considered. You make decisions like this every day with your household budget – the City Council must do the same with the City’s budget. Diminished property values, tourism, and public health and safety will result from further postponing maintenance of potholes, leaky roofs, buckling sidewalks, poorly drained streets, and polluted beaches. Vote NO on Measure T Jill Hardy Flossie Horgan Grace Winchell John Scott Debbie Cook Click here to find out more about the Government Election Info |
