Still think it will be fun, let’s hope it doesn’t become a money-hole.

http://www.tricityvoice.com/articlefiledisplay.php?issue=2007-06-26&file=Editorial%20-%20Brinksmanship.txt

I also realized how unobtrusive the placement of the water park is relative the the rest of the lake. With all the people out, I really felt the lake’s role as a city center this weekend, and can only imagine the water park will draw even more energy.

And, it’s only an aesthetic nightmare for those who live across the Paseo. But, they can always start their own group and give it an important advocacy themed name like Fremont Utilities Conservation Management Entity, or FUC ME for short.

I’m curious about the electric bill, but not ready to write it off as an environmental disaster. I’m a tree-hugger, but have some perspective here!

Financially I can see it may seem frivolous, but we already have baseball diamonds and play-grounds. It is replacing the old swim lagoon that I used to take my kids too. I expect it was paid for by bond money, which is intended to make capital improvements not fix pot-holes.

I was at Great America / Boomerang Bay the day that child drowned, though I was not in the wave pool at the time. Very sad indeed, but I’m not going to stop taking my kids to water parks. Since that accident, the water parks are very pushy about putting life vests on small children. I’m also sure they learned some lessons from the slide collapse. I know that if I see the staff unable to control the situation I’ll be talking to the manager on my way out.

The Silman center is fun, but having an outdoor park in the area will be a good thing too.

Speaking as a parent, I’m looking forward to it opening…

Yes, they can. I’ve seen it happen over and over again, most recently with the new fire station and the new community park in Niles.

Then opines… it seems once the city (council/government) has its mind made up, citizen input is irrelevant.

I guess it’s difficult to prove, but I have seen it happen again and again. But – it doesn’t help to come in at the tail end and only then start to become familiar with the project and only then begin to raise questions.

I’ve seen the city council go from a 5/0 or 4/1 vote for or against something to the opposite based on what people had to say at the meeting. More often, a vote is delayed while the concerns raised are examined. In any regard, don’t forget, the citizens are the city. You have to be proactive if you want to make a difference.

By-the-way, while it is difficult for an unknown to be appointed to the planning commission (or someone who opposes the mayor on key issues,) there are many city boards and commissions where a difference can be made and most are very eager for new members.

That’s not really what I asked. I’m assuming people can find out about the projects at the planning stage. Been there, done that.

But once a person or group knows about a project, and has some concerns, can they realistically influence the outcome?

That’s the real question. Whether it’s Sabercat or the ballpark or the water park or transportation projects, it seems once the city (council/government) has its mind made up, citizen input is irrelevant.

There are several ways in which people can find out about these projects when they are in the early planning stages.

1.) Attend city council, planning commission, recreational commission, etc meetings. The water park has been a topic of discussion at all three of these for quite a few years, from its very early concept stages on through to final designs and construction.

2.) Read the agendas for those meetings on line. It only takes a couple of minutes each week to find out what’s going to be discussed and then decide if you want to attend.

3.) Attend the capital spending meetings. These meetings are where the real meat of proposed projects are discussed.

4.) Sit back and wait to read about it in the Argus or someone tells you about it. This appears to be the preferred method of most people. It’s a shame as it’s the method with the least potential for people to influence projects.

Which of the above methods do you (collectively) prefer?

But you’re still just guessing. We have actual numbers about water usage. Let’s see some actual numbers about electricity usage.

And how do those figures compare to something like Nummi or Costco?

There are plenty of legitimate criticisms of the water park. The final cost. Competition from other water parks. Relative utility compared to Newark’s year-round indoor water park. Whether a city should even own such a facility.

More broadly, how do citizens influence such things before they get built?

Meanwhile, perhaps PG&E can install one of their “smart meters” and scale back the water pumps when electricity demand peaks.