March 2005

Update about possibly building a County structure in our dog park.

Yesterday I (Howard Lazar) had a lengthy conversation with Ms. Lisa DeCarlo of the County Administrator's Office.

She's the project manager of the proposed public safety building - a project that is independent of the Civic Center renaissance committee plan.  The building, it is proposed, could go up on our dog park and the petanque courts, or it could be placed on the jurors' parking lot, or the Christmas tree lot near the highway.  She said that heroffice has ordered the soil tested (which they have begun), and that various reports will be submitted to her office on whether the park would be suitable for a public safety building, the size of which they're not yet definite. Naturally, I argued all the points as to why it should not be placed there and suggested where it could be placed.  She, a dog owner herself, told me that her office was interested in having such a building accepted by the immediate community and not merely imposed upon everyone.

In answer to my further questions, she said that it will be about one to two months before the reports are expected to come back to her office, after which time the community workshops will begin. I told her that I, and others, will attend the workshops.  She put me, as well as Field of Dogs, on the mailing list for notification.

I was gratified by this conversation.  Not only had she called me back and we talked for twenty minutes on the county's nickel, but I sensed a sincerity on her part about considering the wishes of the community: adjacent homedwellers as well as Field of Dogs patrons.

Last night, at the park, I relayed this information to Jodie and to Cyndi Fugh (the lady who was born in the house behind the park and who had e-mailed all of us with the county announcement).  Cyndi is mobilized to encourage her neighbors to protest the building for aesthetic reasons: why look out on a building instead of beautiful open space?

Anyhow, if their reports proclaim that the 'field of dogs' would not be suitable for a building, then the County Administrator will report this to the Board of Supervisors. If the reports say the opposite, then we have a chance to argue it and, with enough support,  hopefully kill it in the workshop level.  If we are not able to do so, then we will need at least 100 patrons and home dwellers to come with us to the Board of Supervisors.

By the way, Patricia came up with a powerful and simple argument against a building on our park: the immediate proximity of a county building with parked trucks, bulldozers, and other disaster equipment for handling disasters, will have an adverse effect on the property value of the next-door homes. I intend to use this as a sword.  In fact, I intend to contact realtor Jim Walsh whom I have known for nearly 20 years and who used to come to Field of Dogs: I will ask him to support us with either a written statement concurring with this viewpoint or personally testify to this at the appropriate time.

Howard