Letter: Public can expect openness from BC Rec

EDITOR,
County Supervisor Mark Stone’s letter about the proposed Boulder Creek Recreation and Parks District Recreation Hall was encouraging (“BC Rec relocation should be a public process,” March 12).
As we know, rezoning of this site will follow statutory guidelines. Anyone knowing reasons that would prevent the rezoning should come forward now, not later. Not doing so would be a disservice to the community. However, it would irresponsible to imply such problems exist without specific details.
Stone encourages public participation in this project’s process, as does the BCRPD board, wholeheartedly. But his word choice, “demand,” implies the board is reluctant to see an open process. The opposite is the truth. The BCRPD board always welcomes community involvement.
Since September, BCRPD has hosted a dozen fully legally noticed board and informational meetings — events promoted in mass mailings and in numerous newspaper articles and that were well-attended. “Demand” for a public process isn’t necessary, since the public can already always expect fully open BCRPD meetings.
Any suggestion that alternative locations have not been considered is wrong. The board considered all known possible sites. Opponents have never proposed any better site for the new recreation hall. That strongly suggests there isn’t one.
The BCRPD board listens to any public suggestions about the new recreation hall project. The board always gives due consideration to any such input.
BCRPD constituents need a better recreation hall. The board is committed to realizing that vision while minimizing and mitigating any impacts it can. The BCRPD board is being completely responsible in its proposed new recreation hall project.