Human chain around park.

Post Reply
XT225
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3913
Joined: Jun 2nd, 2009, 4:37 pm

Re: Human chain around park.

Post by XT225 »

rustled wrote:
This is what we don't love about the "no" side. Why keep repeating that line "getting rid of the splash park"? Too bad Litke didn't check the facts before he said it. Clearly, ex-mayors are no more infallible than anyone else.

But surely, now that we know he was mistaken, surely it is time for the "no" side to stop repeating this misinformation? Surely it is time to stop misrepresenting the Trio group's proposal?

In your previous post, you insist we must fix blame. ToddT seems to think that proper consideration of the Trio proposal somehow hinges on understanding the ball park and hockey dorm.

Seriously, what is the point of blame, and grudges, and clinging to negative baggage from the past?

Why not just look at what's actually in this proposal, judge it on its own merits, and move forward?


While it IS true that the splash park is proposed to be moved (and thats fine), what about the loss of trees? That, according to Litke was not on the table at the time, nor was the waterslide (not for certain). It is apparent that at sometime over the period that the expansion was proposed until now, that other things were added, changed and "hoped for". Nobody is concerned about the Marina upgrade, nor the restaurant, and the No side is mostly NOT opposed to any waterslides; just not in that park. The Native lands are a far better option and far more visible. One has to wonder why Trio wouldn't now go after PIB for a lease and keep EVERYone happy. Now thats a positive idea. Enough of this "negative/ignore the majority" and fix the friggin problem.
User avatar
Fancy
Insanely Prolific
Posts: 71710
Joined: Apr 15th, 2006, 6:23 pm

Re: Human chain around park.

Post by Fancy »

Doesn't the marina upgrade include a revised trailer parking lot? Less trees?
Truths can be backed up by facts - do you have any?
Fancy this, Fancy that and by the way, T*t for Tat
ToddT
Übergod
Posts: 1023
Joined: Dec 16th, 2010, 2:48 pm

Re: Human chain around park.

Post by ToddT »

rustled wrote:ToddT seems to think that proper consideration of the Trio proposal somehow hinges on understanding the ball park and hockey dorm.

Seriously, what is the point of blame, and grudges, and clinging to negative baggage from the past?

Why not just look at what's actually in this proposal, judge it on its own merits, and move forward?


A history of backroom deals and misguided judgement? Surely we should slip that under the rug! Lol I thought we voted for transparency?
twobits
Guru
Posts: 8115
Joined: Nov 25th, 2010, 8:44 am

Re: Human chain around park.

Post by twobits »

rustled wrote:
But I am curious: How do you, personally, feel about the rest of what Trio's current proposal is suggesting for that area?



Proposal is the key word to focus on here. You say they have a proposal. I would say they just provided a very vague concept. And at that, a concept that has no financing secured as per their own admission. The whole concept is so loosy goosy it is laughable. And this current council bought it hook line and sinker. If Yamaha had to go to make way for some grander plan....so be it. But you do not evict a going concern, sign a lease with a new entity, until a concrete plan complete with financing has been presented. I see absolutely no reason why the status quo could not have existed while the City and the RFP respondents hammered out an actual and factual plan, with engineered drawings instead of an "artists rendition" that could be presented to council fully funded and then open to public scrutiny and discussion at public hearings. Instead, we get inaccurate water colour drawings, water slide bomb shells, no financing plans, and only a "trust us, this will be great for Penticton". "We'll work out those petty details later".....after we've secured a 29 yr lease and two five year options.

I talked to one of the Trio Principals in person and viewed the conceptual drawing provided to the public for viewing with him. After some direct questions, he admitted that the drawings as presented were not actual plans and were just meant to convey some ideas of what the area could potentially look like. That is where he lost me. He cemented my feelings on the project when he admitted that without the water slide, the rest of the project was not viable. If that were the linchpin to the deal, how is it possible the in nearly two years of prior talks in the back rooms of City Hall, and prior to the Civic election in Nov 2014, that little detail was not revealed?
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
rustled
Admiral HMS Castanet
Posts: 25209
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 12:47 pm

Re: Human chain around park.

Post by rustled »

Twobits, it seems to me you're putting the cart well before the horse. I think when people are hell-bent on seeing wrongdoing, they see it everywhere. Think about it:

Stage 1: Council is elected on a mandate to revitalize. One of the areas badly in need of revitalization is the Skaha marina area. (You don't have to agree, of course. But I suspect most people if they thought about it would agree that the previous leases didn't make the best use of that part of Skaha Park.)

Stage 2: City puts out a request for proposals. Anyone with a plan can bid; all movers and shakers, previous leaseholders, anyone. Preferably someone with a vision that goes beyond "business as usual", since that's what they've been elected to do. None of these proposals will involve solid costs and final plans. What sane business person would invest in those at this stage of the game?

Stage 3: City reviews proposals to select the one they feel best matches with what they were elected to do: revitalization. No, they didn't discuss the proposals with the public at this time. Contrary to what the "no" side would like us to think, this does not prove a backroom deal was in the works. To discuss proposals at this stage would have been just plain wrong, because until the RFP was fully closed anyone could take someone else's idea and run with it.

Stage 4: City makes their selection and works with the proponents on a more solidified concept. No, it's still not solid and fully costed. Again, what sane business person invests in that at this stage of the game? Now the city signs the agreement which will allow the proponents to go to investors and secure funding.

Contrary to what the "no" side would like us to think, it's unlikely any "movers and shakers" behind any proposal would have attempted to secure funding without that agreement. What would you say if you were an investor, and a group of businessmen approached you without an agreement? Bet it would be something along the lines of "don't waste my time".

Stage 5: Signed agreement in hand, proponents secure investors. Only now is it time to do the hard work of a fully costed plan. (Of course, in this case, they'll be paying for the archaeological assessment, and things may change again before they're ready to return with that fully costed plan.)

As I said earlier, the negative ninjas had already gathered en masse to kick the crap out of it before we got anywhere near stage 5. People like our parents, who were once savvy businesspersons, who once understood you don't go after financing before an agreement and you don't produce a final plan until you have that in place, read and regurgitate the nonsense from the letters to the editor without giving it so much as a second thought.

ToddT: There's a big difference between learning from the past, and letting it blind you to the present and future. Unfortunately, this community gets paralyzed by those who can't seem to over the past on a regular basis.

There's a huge difference between acting in a principled way, and using principles as blinders.
There is nothing more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. - Martin Luther King Jr.
jamapple
Übergod
Posts: 1552
Joined: Oct 1st, 2008, 10:00 pm

Re: Human chain around park.

Post by jamapple »

So, you think everyone should just sit and wait for all parties involved to give actual drawings of what will actually be put there before deciding wheather it's a good idea or a bad one? No thanks.

It really doesn't matter what the first drawings, or the final drawings look like.....we don't want it on public land right next to the lake. What part of this do your side simply not understand? It has been said only 1476 times.....BUILD A WATERSLIDE.....JUST NOT WHERE YOU WANT TO PUT IT!!!

Can anyone else on here see why they wouldn't just go and buy a piece of property and go and do this, without ANY resistance from anyone??? Oh!!! I know!!! Because they know the loss of revenue in the off season would mean like it meant to all the other failed waterslides in town. You can't sit on a piece of property over the winter and make money. But wait!! Let's put one right by the lake on a piece of prime real estate, and not worry about any revenue losses over the winter months!

Again...GO FIND A PIECE OF LAND, BUY IT, AND BUILD IT.
XT225
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3913
Joined: Jun 2nd, 2009, 4:37 pm

Re: Human chain around park.

Post by XT225 »

jamapple wrote:So, you think everyone should just sit and wait for all parties involved to give actual drawings of what will actually be put there before deciding wheather it's a good idea or a bad one? No thanks.

It really doesn't matter what the first drawings, or the final drawings look like.....we don't want it on public land right next to the lake. What part of this do your side simply not understand? It has been said only 1476 times.....BUILD A WATERSLIDE.....JUST NOT WHERE YOU WANT TO PUT IT!!!

Can anyone else on here see why they wouldn't just go and buy a piece of property and go and do this, without ANY resistance from anyone??? Oh!!! I know!!! Because they know the loss of revenue in the off season would mean like it meant to all the other failed waterslides in town. You can't sit on a piece of property over the winter and make money. But wait!! Let's put one right by the lake on a piece of prime real estate, and not worry about any revenue losses over the winter months!

Again...GO FIND A PIECE OF LAND, BUY IT, AND BUILD IT.


Excellent post, jamapple. The talk of the coffee shop today was that Trio should put the slides on the Native lands West of Green Ave. Nobody can understand why they haven't tried. Would keep everyone happy and no loss of park space. The natives are anxious for tenants and it couldn't be more visible than that location. Excellent spot. Don't need to BUY the land either; long term leasing is the way to go. Nobody could make a go of a waterslide, nowadays, in this area if they had to purchase the land. In a growing community such as ours, who will require MORE parklands in the future, its a$$inine to consider giving up any at present, when we only will need more later and at prices in the future that we won't be able to afford to buy up. The few YES folks on here keep trying to portray the NO side as negative and non-progressive. Thats just wrong. I have not talked to ANY one who is against the slides but 99% of the folks we hear from are completely against losing the parkland that is in the proposal. I also do not agree that the slides are necessary to keep the venture feasible. I would say the opposite in fact. A decent, year round restaurant on Skaha Lake would do well and could be what keeps the Marina afloat year round.
rustled
Admiral HMS Castanet
Posts: 25209
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 12:47 pm

Re: Human chain around park.

Post by rustled »

LOL. Wow. Pretty emotional, folks.

Trio responded to an RFP from the city for revitalization of the Skaha marina area of Skaha Park.

We could post that a million times and it would never sink in, you'd still just regurgitate whatever the cool kids are saying in the letters to the editor and at your coffee table.

As to whether or not a project's proponents should be allowed to present their case before they're kicked to the curb, we're going to wait and see what Trio actually comes up with before we decide whether we're for or against it. It just seems more sensible than getting all excited about it at this point.

And man, we are sure glad peer pressure and tantrums aren't calling the shots at city hall.
There is nothing more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. - Martin Luther King Jr.
ToddT
Übergod
Posts: 1023
Joined: Dec 16th, 2010, 2:48 pm

Re: Human chain around park.

Post by ToddT »

rustled wrote:
ToddT: There's a big difference between learning from the past, and letting it blind you to the present and future. Unfortunately, this community gets paralyzed by those who can't seem to over the past on a regular basis.

There's a huge difference between acting in a principled way, and using principles as blinders.


Ya that all sounds great. Let's just talk about the "fun stuff" right???
rustled
Admiral HMS Castanet
Posts: 25209
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 12:47 pm

Re: Human chain around park.

Post by rustled »

Or we could just talk like grownups. Using common sense, facts, dull stuff like that :)

Whether we pick sides and bicker or not, whether we choose pragmatism or emotionalism, the sky won't fall, The world will keep turning, and we'll all still be in this together.
There is nothing more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. - Martin Luther King Jr.
User avatar
Michael Brydon
Newbie
Posts: 35
Joined: Oct 6th, 2010, 2:00 pm

Re: Human chain around park.

Post by Michael Brydon »

rustled wrote:For example, the display for the petition showcased the Ellis and Shatford buildings, neither of which were at risk at that point since the SD and COP had each taken responsibility for saving one of them. But who knows how many petition signers thought that by signing the petition, they were saving the Ellis and Shatford?


Yeah, this is not quite right. The group was (originally) called Save Our North Gym. The focus was not on the Shatford and Ellis buildings but on the former Pen-Hi auditorium and North Gym. The argument we made at the time was that that Penticton should save its only large auditorium (however shabby) because we guessed a new one would not be built for a long time. And if we were going to save the auditorium, we could save the gym too for a few extra pennies. In our naivete we thought this was blindingly obvious.

The more general point made by Rustled, however, concerns litigation against duly elected governments. His/her point is, I think, essentially correct. The Save Our North Gym/Penticton League of Sensible Electors crusade was an expensive lesson for those of us who took part. We sued School District 67 but lost on what I think can fairly be called a technicality. Specifically, we had no "standing" since all of us were either too old or too young to have kids at Pen-Hi. Oops--that little detail cost me a thousand bucks. It cost others quite a bit more. The crux of our argument--that the City and SD 67 were acting recklessly--was never really considered in the court case. I have since come to appreciate that courts are reluctant to weigh-in against duly elected governments. After all, the preferred mechanism of accountability in our system is the ballot box, not the court.

The lesson we all took away from our brief and frustrating stints as "community activists" is that if you are unhappy with your government you are better off paying for lawn signs than lawyers. Of course this is not always practical. As I see it, the solution to this kind of conflict is better (that is, more appropriate) consultation. Easy to say/hard to do. But that is a topic for a different thread...
rustled
Admiral HMS Castanet
Posts: 25209
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 12:47 pm

Re: Human chain around park.

Post by rustled »

Which is exactly why I brought it up, Michael. The petition-gathering display at the mall featured very large images of the Ellis and Shatford buildings, along with big signage that said "save our schools".

That's my point: plenty of people who sign petitions do so because they are drawn in by the emotional sell around the issue, not because they understand the issue.

In this case, it's all about "save the park" as though more than a small piece of it will be affected. The human chain surrounds far more than the waterslide area, and everything is exaggerated for effect while worthwhile improvements are ignored entirely.

We can never know how many people signed the petitions as a result of misunderstandings and the misrepresentations promoted during the campaign, which is why we simply can't use them as tools to gauge public opinion.

As to public consultation: in that case, the mayor during the very lengthy consultation period was Perry, who did not air his concerns about keeping the north gym until he was no longer mayor. To stay quiet while he was in a position to work toward saving the gym and then sue the city for recklessness seemed ridiculous, but the newspaper didn't call him on that. The papers never did provide those who insisted "they" should have been consulted with any of the facts about how long and thorough the consultation period actually was, who was invited, who participated, or what the school board's responsibilities actually were.

Instead, they very willingly provided upset people with a soapbox that ensured an emotional controversy would snowball out of all proportion. Letters to the editor were still calling for those buildings to be saved, long after they had been, and the paper kept printing them.

Many very good and decent people in our community got caught up in it and spent a great deal of their effort and money supporting Perry's crusade, when they probably could have saved the auditorium if they had instead focused their energy where it belonged.

We see exactly the same kind of manipulations at play here, and it's terribly unfortunate for everyone involved.

As you say, it's a costly lesson. But it's not just the financial cost. All this passion and energy that's being channeled into controversy, argument, and bickering could be put to much better use.
There is nothing more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. - Martin Luther King Jr.
XT225
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3913
Joined: Jun 2nd, 2009, 4:37 pm

Re: Human chain around park.

Post by XT225 »

rustled wrote:
Many very good and decent people in our community got caught up in it and spent a great deal of their effort and money supporting Perry's crusade, when they probably could have saved the auditorium if they had instead focused their energy where it belonged.
.


Exactly right. I don't know about Perry and what he did or didn't do to try to save the Auditorium. I sure don't recall any 900+ people rallying to save the auditorium; but in THIS case we have a great number of people actually out there TRYING to save the Parkland and good on em! They are focusing their energy where it belongs; trying to preserve what we will never be able to afford to buy again. Also, why try to save for purchasing more parkland in the future when we presently already own it? Its not rocket science but a few just can't seem to grasp the concept.
rustled
Admiral HMS Castanet
Posts: 25209
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 12:47 pm

Re: Human chain around park.

Post by rustled »

We grasp it, XT225. We simply don't agree with your opinion that this small piece of Skaha Park will better serve current and future generations if it's kept in its current state. So again, it boils down to a difference of opinion.

It's really not that difficult to find 900+ people who are willing to get emotional about an issue like this one. There's a real cachet to saving trees, isn't there? Some of the protest in the initial stages of the Pen Hi reconstruction project was focused squarely on the potential loss of trees on the property.

If the right people had been made aware trees were being sacrificed to expand trailer parking at Skaha, or to put in the initial parking lots and structures for the previous lessees way back when, it's likely they could have whipped up a stiff opposition to those projects, too. But neither of those projects destroyed Skaha park, any more than the loss of natural green space to the other parking lots or the ball court or the volleyball courts or the tennis courts or the discovery park or the first splash pad or the concessions did.

We simply don't feel it's at all reasonable to claim that using this small part of the park as something other than natural green space will destroy Skaha Park either. So using "save the park" as their slogan for this crusade doesn't strike us as noble at all. Well-intentioned, perhaps, but when they're collecting money from people to further their cause, and asking others to take the risk of a lawsuit they could lose, they'd best be sure they have more than good intentions on their side, and they'd best make sure they're not misrepresenting the facts.

The world kept turning when Loco Landing was built and when Pen Hi was rebuilt. It kept turning when all the other changes were made to Skaha Park. The sun will still rise even after the much-protested daycare opens near Skaha Park. And it will keep rising regardless of which trees are lost and which are gained, what pavement gets moved away from the lakeshore, what new features are built.

We will keep volunteering in our community in ways that strengthen and build, and we will continue to focus on the good qualities of all of our neighbours. But we will probably always be disappointed when we see others so easily choosing negativity and protest, and so vigorously encouraging others to follow suit.
There is nothing more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. - Martin Luther King Jr.
rustled
Admiral HMS Castanet
Posts: 25209
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 12:47 pm

Re: Human chain around park.

Post by rustled »

XT225 wrote:While it IS true that the splash park is proposed to be moved (and thats fine), what about the loss of trees? ...

My apologies for not responding to your question.

We went and had a look at those trees, and yes, some of them are pretty mature (although I'm no arborist, so I can't say much about how long they've been growing or how much longer they'd be with us if left alone.) And yes, it is always a real shame to lose those, along with the younger trees that are just getting established. We were quite pleased to see how many new trees Trio proposed planting, especially those that are proposed for areas that are currently asphalt, and while it does take time for those to grow, we're willing to practice patience when necessary, and we feel this is one of those times.

And of course I certainly understand the emotional attachment to trees planted in memorium, but frankly, if any kid of mine ever used a tree planted in my memory to raise this kind of ruckus with their neighbours, I'd be very disappointed. I hope I've raised them to be able to look at the bigger picture, to focus on solutions, and to work together to strengthen their community.
There is nothing more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. - Martin Luther King Jr.
Post Reply

Return to “South Okanagan”