Decline to sign parks petition | Letter

Despite the fact that this group received minimal public support for the first two petitions, the "Protect Our Parks" (POP) group submitted a third petition in an attempt to restrict the use of Mercer Island parks.

Despite the fact that this group received minimal public support for the first two petitions, the “Protect Our Parks” (POP) group submitted a third petition in an attempt to restrict the use of Mercer Island parks.

In fact, the first petition drive was so full of misinformation that 120 people who signed it ended up sending in “unsign” requests to the city. Once again, Support Mercer Island Parks and Arts urges Mercer Island voters to decline to sign. The following are only a few of the reasons you should decline to sign. For more information, see www.supportmiparksandarts.com.

The POP ordinance is unnecessary. There has been no showing by POP that our parks are under threat in any way. In fact, in recent years Mercer Island park land has significantly increased, not decreased — more than 80 acres added in the last 20 years alone. What is POP’s motivation? According to their website, it is delay or even prevention of the construction of the Mercer Island Center for the Arts (MICA).

The ordinance is poorly written. Although the language in the proposed ordinance is similar to Seattle’s parks initiative, it contains several significant differences. The language that POP supporters have added to the Seattle ordinance makes no sense and only serves to confuse voters. Unfortunately, the only result of the poorly written language is that the city will be taken to court any time the city attempts to comply with the provisions of the ordinance. This result is not surprising, given that this petition is POP’s third attempt to draft an ordinance.

The POP ordinance is not “democratic.” The POP supporters claim that all they want is a democratic vote; however, we are now on our third round of submitted petitions, and none of them were produced democratically. Mercer Island elected the City Council to manage its affairs, including the management of our parks. No one voted for the tiny but vocal group of people who drafted a third poorly-worded ordinance in their living rooms with no public input whatsoever. Further, this same tiny group of obstinately angry people have included a provision in the proposed ordinance that gives them free reign to hold the city hostage with litigation any time they disagree with any action taken under this ordinance.

The ordinance will waste taxpayer’s dollars. First, the cost to provide “replacement land” for every action that falls within the proposed ordinance will be exorbitant, as land on Mercer Island is scarce and land value is extremely high. Second, as with the first two unsuccessful petitions, the proposed ordinance is likely to generate litigation any time any action is taken under the ordinance.

The ordinance is not feasible. Mercer Island doesn’t have the same flexibility that Seattle has with respect to land that is available to meet the requirements of the ordinance. The city of Seattle has 83.78 square miles of land. Mercer Island, in contrast, has only 13.11 square miles of land. The possibilities for finding land that could be utilized to meet the requirements of the proposed ordinance are dramatically and severely restricted on Mercer Island.

MICA will greatly enhance the Town Center. POP supporters misleadingly refer to MICA as a “private developer.” However, this statement is false. MICA is a cultural nonprofit, much like the Seattle Art Museum, the Seattle Symphony, the Seattle Repertory Theatre and the Pacific Northwest Ballet. Yes, MICA will be financed with community funds, but under state law, in order to locate the facility on public property, MICA must commit to serving a public purpose. MICA will serve as the home base for Youth Theatre Northwest, a community gem that formerly rented public space from the school district. MICA is dedicated to housing a variety of nonprofit arts groups and bringing much needed cultural opportunities to Mercer Island. The fact that our citizens are willing to donate substantial funds, time and energy to build MICA is an amazing community benefit, not fodder for criticism. MICA will revitalize the space now occupied by the decrepit and abandoned recycling center and provide a much needed heart to our Town Center.

Robynne Parkinson

Mercer Island