Author: The Bulletin Editorial Board

Bend Park & Recreation District officials take community input seriously. They do polls and hold community open houses to determine what taxpayers want, and they tailor their plans accordingly.

Back in 2004, that meant scrapping plans for a bond issue to build a westside version of Juniper Swim & Fitness Center.

This year, it means the district will go forward with plans for a $29 million bond to fill in gaps on the river trail, build an ice rink and help Oregon State University-Cascades Campus with expansion plans, among others.

What they won’t do with this bond, however, is move forward with a study of Mirror Pond or the building of a skate park.

Mirror Pond is too controversial and not solely a park district responsibility, said Executive Director Don Horton, and the skate park suffered a “lack of support from voters.”

That made them unattractive items for a bond issue, Horton said, and we can’t dispute that reality. To enhance chances of bond approval, the district needs to focus on the things voters are willing to pay for. Attracting controversy doesn’t enhance chances of bond passage, and we support the bond.

Still, what to do about Mirror Pond and a skate park?

A few years ago, most of the public talk about Mirror Pond focused on finding the money to pay for dredging. More recently, the panel discussing next steps is hearing from those who think big changes would be better, possibly removing the dam and returning the river to a more natural course. What had seemed obvious has become controversial, at least among those trying to fix the problem.

Without a poll or a vote, we can’t know if attitudes have really shifted, but we think there’s still enormous support for preserving the pond by dredging. If voters were given a clear option for that, we think there’s a good chance they’d vote to pay for it. If, however, they are asked to pay for studies with unknown result, support would be much less certain.

The skate park has different issues. Lack of support in surveys is not surprising, and shows the danger in relying entirely on such tools. Skateboarders are less likely to respond to a survey or to attend meetings, and the unsavory reputation of skateboarders survives despite being outdated.

Across the nation, other communities have provided impressive new facilities for skateboarders, a group that now includes many responsible adults as well as youngsters. Yes, it’s a small group, but it’s also a small cost relative to all the other planned expenditures.

Horton says work toward a skate park will go forward using resources the district already has, rather than money from the bond. That sounds fine. We would understand if advocates are skeptical, though, given the long time they’ve been meeting with park district officials and seeing other projects move ahead to completion.

For years now, the silt has continued to pile up in Bend’s Mirror Pond while officials have struggled to find a solution.

Committees are formed, meetings held, staff briefly hired.

But the silt continues to pile up amid reports that there just isn’t enough money to deal with it.

Two Bulletin readers wrote last week urging the Bend Park & Recreation District to drop its new projects and concentrate on the pond. They reflect the frustration many feel when they read about wonderful plans while the prime jewel of the city deteriorates.

The park district doesn’t have sole responsibility for Mirror Pond, but it is the agency with money to do optional things. A bridge at the First Street Rapids or the purchase of the old Mt. Bachelor Park and Ride property are great, but hardly essential. So why not just focus on Mirror Pond?

One answer, according to the park district’s Executive Director Don Horton, is that the district is constrained by state law to spend its money only on recreation. Although rescuing Mirror Pond may contribute to recreation, he said, many other issues are involved.

The district does plan to include questions about Mirror Pond in an upcoming survey, asking respondents if they think a special district should be formed for Mirror Pond or if they prefer a bond issue for a one-time fix.

Results of the survey will help guide the park district in deciding among its many high-priced possible projects, Horton said.

Meanwhile, City of Bend Community Development Department Director Mel Oberst has agreed to take on a coordinating role on the Mirror Pond issue, working with the park district and other interested parties, as well as researching requirements of state and federal agencies. Oberst said the park district’s survey results will help guide the next steps for the group.

We’re in favor of preserving Mirror Pond, and we hope the group’s work will lead swiftly to a public vote if that’s what’s needed. A bond issue for studying alternatives would be a hard sell, but voters are likely to support one that offers a clear path to preserve the pond.

Source: The Bulletin

Bend’s Mirror Pond is more than a pond. It is an arresting symbol of the city that should not be lost. As the years go by, the pond is becoming a mudflat. Sediment has settled behind the dam.

Geese may soon waddle rather than swim. Paddles may be used to push, not row. Bend’s butterfly is becoming a caterpillar.

The effort to fix the pond has become as muddied as the pond.

The consultant hired to evaluate alternatives has been let go. There is no money for an analysis weighing alternative solutions, costing maybe $500,000 — let alone a fix which might add another $5 million.

Spending some money on a study for alternatives seems inescapable. Without a rigorous analysis, the state or the federal government would likely refuse approval of a fix. Without an analysis, chances of getting the federal government to chip in any money would be lost.

Where will the money come from?

The city of Bend doesn’t have it. The Bend Park & Recreation District may be doing relatively better financially, but it would be hard to argue that pond upkeep is part of its mission.

So the city is looking at creating a taxing district, perhaps putting it before voters in November 2012.

We’d vote for a taxing district to pay to dredge Mirror Pond. But is that what the tax would pay for? Would the tax sunset? Would the taxing district create a permanent, new bureaucratic fiefdom?

Some have proposed that the natural, permanent fix would be to remove dams and let the Deschutes resume its course. The pond would become a river again. There likely would be less need to come back in another 25 years and dredge again, though Bend’s centerpiece would be gone.

A taxing district for Mirror Pond has a chance, but only if voters know what they are paying for.

Source: The Bulletin