pages: RecreationandParkCommission/2009-09-10.pdf, 6
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
RecreationandParkCommission | 2009-09-10 | 6 | Rebecca Redfield, Alameda resident, stated that her son attended the Alameda Boys & Girls Club until they recently closed. She has moved to where the potential park was going to be in the warehouse area on Clement Avenue and had moved there based on the planning map and hopes there will be a park in that area. We have been working hard and putting energy toward acquiring funds toward this park and now suddenly the Alameda Boys & Girls Club thinks they should get the money. This is a step backward in the dream for a park in that area. Jean Sweeney, Alameda Beltline representative and Alameda resident, stated that she was one of the participants in the meeting with Mr. Rasmussen and the Ecology panel. The people on the Ecology Panel were a little dismayed that Mr. Rasmussen would send an e-mail favoring a Boys & Girls Club project. They did not seem to think that it would fit within a category. The Panel stated that the process is not to have it referred by City Council. The process is to have an open meeting where everybody can discuss what they want to do with the funds. This is City money and a City decision and a decision to be made by the City Council. The projects are sent to the Council, the City then takes them to Mr. Rasmussen who then consults with EBRPD lawyers to find out if the projects are eligible. To short cut them/the process by having a communication between George Phillips and Mr. Rasmussen based on Mr. Phillips own material is patently unfit. Mr. Rasmussen sat there and stated that anybody can go to the Boys & Girls Club, it is free. Ms. Sweeney stated that we all know that is not true. He (Mr. Rasmussen) did not even know where the Boys & Girls Club was located until she showed him the location. He did not know that the building does not include a field for recreation and that they are going to depend on Woodstock Park for their outdoor field and activities. He did not know that the Boys & Girls Club was really a social development organization and not a recreation organization. He did not know that they were going to have room for family services to do counseling, a room for medical screening, etc. Mr. Rasmussen did not understand the mission of the Boys & Girls Club. It is not a recreation program; it is a private organization and is not free. It gears itself to school-age children; it is closed on Sundays, closes early on Saturdays, and closes every day at 6:00 p.m. He told me that Chipman does not have a gymnasium, but she remembers that there was someone who had a special program to keep the Chipman gymnasium open for activities. She looked into the Boys & Girls Club itself and they said they had a program, when she substituted at the school (Chipman) they had activities in the Chipman gymnasium. Mr. Rasmussen stated that now Chipman will have a gymnasium through the Boys & Girls Club. Ms. Sweeney stated that he (Mr. Rasmussen) needs to have a more biased presentation of where this money should go. It should go to our parks. In talking with Director Lillard, the number of people who participate in the City's recreation and park activities during the year is in the tens of thousands. Ms. Sweeney would not be upset if $1 million went to the Alameda Beltline, $1 million to Estuary Park, and $1.4 million went to recreation and parks. She does not understand why the Boys and Girls Club wants to apply for a couple of hundred boys that use a big building and deserve to have the Measure WW bond funds. The Boys and Girls Club does a wonderful job with kids but it is not a recreational facility. Pat Bail, Alameda resident, stated that a similar agreement was done with the College of Alameda but the difference was that the City was in control of the project and 25-year agreement with the option to reevaluate when the 25-year agreement was up. With the Boys and Girls Club request they are talking about handing over $2 million to a private organization; we have no control, no input, we will never get the money back. Passive parks are great, but when she thinks for recreation she thinks of kids playing on fields, Recreation & Park Commission Special Mtg. 3 Minutes - Thursday, September 10, 2009 | RecreationandParkCommission/2009-09-10.pdf |