![firerings.jpg](https://westseattleblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/firerings.jpg)
Right after the city Parks Board‘s meeting last night, we posted a quick update to say the beach-fire discussion hadn’t taken any startling turns. Lots more to say about it, of course, so here we go – and after our account of that discussion, we have a few other West Seattle-related notes from the meeting:
![twoparksladies.jpg](https://westseattleblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/twoparksladies.jpg)
There you see Royal Alley-Barnes (left) and Cheryl Fraser, the Parks Department managers whose briefing paper ignited a blazing controversy last week (here on WSB, and elsewhere). They and Parks Superintendent Tim Gallagher took great pains last night to try to bury the whole beach fires/climate-change linkage inference so far down in the sand, it was last seen bumping into clams.
“Let me do a little groveling on this first,” is how Gallagher opened the discussion, apologizing to board members and contending that the memo that got out was supposed to be just to him, but “got carried forward farther and faster than it should have been.” He insisted the only goal was to “have a discussion with (the board)” about the problems the department is having with illegal beach fires.
Alley-Barnes and Fraser then plowed bravely through their briefing, knowing the superintendent had stated days ago that no action would be taken this year, and saying along the way that they realized the climate-change connection suggestion was “weak” and that they “had egg on (their) face.”
After a few historical facts — beach fires date back to 1923! — the thrust of the rather dramatic presentation was that illegal beach fires are causing mega-trouble on Golden Gardens in particular, and to a lesser degree, on Alki as well.
Though later it would be said again that they didn’t really mean to link the beach-fire concerns to environmental concerns, there was a slide up front that asked rhetorically about what the Parks and Recreation Department can do to address various environmental concerns – improve vehicle mileage, manage sprinkler systems responsibly, “explore varying work shifts,” etc.
The briefing then went — briefly — into the 2002 backstory about a regional agency citing the city for allowing illegal materials to be burned in the fire rings, and how the department overhauled the program since then. For example, staff members were assigned to sites to enforce proper use and make sure fires were out by 11 pm, during the May-September peak-use months. The cost of this program is $95,000 a year, according to the briefing.
(Later, board vice chair Jackie Ramels, past president of the Alki Community Council, said that sounded cheap to her, for managing the programs at two big city beaches that bring so much enjoyment to so many people.)
One of the staff members who works with beach fires then spoke to the board. Ted Baker works at Golden Gardens, which he called “a complete madhouse … We have cars parked all over the grass, in the fire lanes, school’s almost out, this is a daily problem that staff deals with down there … People will put a car wherever they can and will start a fire wherever they can and for eight hours we play catchup” — and worse, he said, noting the difficulty of trying to tell drunken people to put out illegal beach fires.
“We really need to take a serious look at how we are managing these beaches — we are destroying that beach at Golden Gardens. Come on down to Alki and Golden Gardens on a Friday or Saturday night and see what goes on down there and see if we still want to have beach fires in the city. … After dark, it looks like the Fourth of July down there.”
Gallagher acknowledged that he hadn’t seen the beach-fire situation firsthand, as this is his first summer here (he moved from Los Angeles after taking the Parks Superintendent job last fall); he said he might go out and take a look as soon as tonight.
Ramels wanted to know what or who had sparked the concept of reviving the beach-fire-ban discussion. Gallagher insisted again, “The intent is not to eliminate fires or reduce the number of fires, the intent is to have a discussion about the problems we are having with illegal fires, trash, drinking, damage done to the beach … we cannot ignore that we have a problem and that’s where it came from. The few people who are doing it illegally are ruining it for the people who are doing it right. You can’t ignore it, it’s only going to get worse.”
He asked the board for suggestions; theirs included expanding the new Park Ranger program to help patrol the beaches, or assigning fire rings through a reservation system like the one used for picnic shelters.
But board member Terry Holme wanted to be clear that any sort of ban or dramatic restrictions would not be the way to go. Noting he was the only member of the board left from the previous go-round on a proposed beach-fire ban, he said, “I do feel it’s good to get public information out, but not necessary for the board to go through this whole process again … Based on all the public input (then), the board was unanimous in supporting the program, so I think it unlikely that the board would change just because we have all new people.”
And board member Neal Adams said flatly that this isn’t just about fires: “The issue is illegal behavior. If alcohol is leading to problems, how do we manage that? When something is illegal in the park, what do we do about that? What can we do differently to deal with illegal behaviors?”
That led to a discussion speculating on how much money the city might be receiving from the fines paid by people who are ticketed for parking and alcohol violations, and whether that money might be used to pay for more employees to help manage the problems.
To keep the focus on the issue of illegal behavior in general, Ramels said, “We’re talking about what to do about beach fires as if it’s going to solve other problems … kids are still going to come down to Alki whether there’s fires or not and they’re going to drink, they’re not just coming for the fires.”
Board chair Amit Ranade closed the discussion by saying, “I think it’s important to raise issues very early on, to allow the public to comment and shape the debate from the start, and I think this is a great example. Now — if the public knew the concern is about proper use of the parks and proper use of the fire pits, that message alone might have in part a positive effect — There’s a real opportunity there.”
No specifics, though, at this point, about if and when this topic might come around again.
CAR-FREE DAY(S) ON ALKI? We mentioned yesterday that a briefing paper for last night’s board meeting had revealed that at least one “car-free day” is being considered for Alki, from Seacrest to 63rd/Alki, in late summer. Here’s that briefing paper. Not a single additional detail emerged last night, however; the Parks staff member who spoke to the board reiterated that it’s a city Transportation Department proposal, so we’ll be checking with SDOT to see where this stands and what happens next.
ALKI COMMUNITY CENTER LEADER’S REASSIGNMENT STILL HAPPENING: Commissioner Ramels brought this up toward the end of the meeting – the impending reassignment of Ken Davis from Alki Community Center to South Park Community Center (as reported here on WSB earlier this month). “I am really sad to see him go,” she said. Deputy Superintendent Christopher Williams said, “We know that (people in these positions) establish relationships … We do have a business need to reassign him to South Park – we think that’s a legitimate, bonafide need that will allow us to utilize his years of service, skills and expertise in an area where we desperately need that.”
FRISBEE, ER, DISC GOLF AT HIGH POINT: Superintendent Gallagher asked the board if it would want to review a request for a portable “disc golf” course to be used at High Point Playfield. He explained that in 1992 a simliar request involving a North Seattle park brought much Park Board concern and discussion, as well as promises to monitor whether trees were damaged as a result. All’s gone well for all those years, he said, and now there’s the High Point request. After a few questions, board members voted to let the superintendent have the final say.
MONEY MOVED FROM WEST SEATTLE STADIUM PROJECT: We don’t have a lot of background on the “West Seattle Stadium project” but it was mentioned at last night’s meeting that half a million dollars will be moved out of that project fund to fix a bridge in another part of town that got knocked off its foundation by a truck crash; it sounded as if this is not expected to have much impact because the project is being “shifted” to other groups/organizations.
REMINDER THAT THERE’S ANOTHER CHANCE TO HAVE A SAY ON POTENTIAL PARKS LEVY: Next Tuesday, 5:30 pm, Seattle Center, one more public hearing at a meeting of the Parks and Green Spaces Levy Citizens’ Advisory Committee — which will have to come up with its recommendation shortly as to whether the City Council should pursue putting a new parks levy on the ballot this fall, when the Pro Parks Levy is expiring.
… AND ANOTHER CHANCE TO HAVE A SAY ON THE PARKS STRATEGIC PLAN: Only one person signed up to speak to the board in an official public hearing on the Strategic Plan, crafted after two huge rounds of public meetings all over the city (WSB report on a first-round meeting here; on a second-round meeting, here). She wondered if enough had been done to let people know about the opportunity. It was noted that comments are still being taken, and people are welcome to speak to the board when they consider the plan at their next meeting in two weeks.
FINAL PARKS BOARD NOTE: We had never attended a meeting of this board before. The board room at Parks HQ is a relatively pleasant place for a meeting, with big windows on the north side of the room looking out into the greenery of Denny Park on the northeast edge of downtown. You can keep an eye on the Parks Board agenda at its website here; its regular meeting dates are the second and fourth Thursdays of each month.
| 21 COMMENTS