Joe Guarino recycles a few paragraphs from a Rhinoceros Times article in which Rhino editor John Hammer bemoans the removal of some trees from City-owned Festival Park downtown. The legitimacy of his complaints is undermined by his totally unsubstantiated remarks that the deed was done at the direction of city patron/bogeyman Jim Melvin.
In the comments, Ed Cone rightly notes how Hammer floats away from the facts with that accusation. But then Ed, followed by Sue Polinsky, does the same damn thing. Ed claims that Center City Park was donated and Sue calls it a "gift that keeps giving." Ed adds the ballpark too.
Center City Park has not been donated. It remains privately owned. Same thing for the ballpark, it was built on formerly public property, procured through a land swap, not a donation.
Why do we in Greensboro, even among our intellectual heavyweights, have such a hard time facing the facts? It is our bane that it's acceptable, even par for the course, in Greensboro to twist, distort, ignore -- whatever it takes to worm our way around facts that are inconvenient to our positions.
Greensboro deserves better.
.
Center City Park was not donated to the City and I didn't say it was; it's unfortunate that Ed used the word "donated" as he did. (The donations are what built the park, not gifting the park itself. Ed's usually very careful with words; this is an unfortunate choice of a particular word.) I did say the park was a gift to the City and it is.
ReplyDelete$11M+ was raised to build the park and make it open to the entire City for a variety of events, large and smaller gatherings. It's a downtown jewel that we wouldn't have without $11M of privately donated money, incredible freely given hours of planning and organization, and payment for and reviewing of plans to build it. The City maintains some of the park's sidewalks and performs other maintenance on a site that the entire City's population can enjoy, which doesn't seem like such a bad deal when you take a breath and understand how much we get out of the park.
Although it's nice to be included in a category of "intellectual heavyweights," let's get the facts in order. The park is there for us to use and point to and enjoy and advertise what a public-private partnership can do. That's a "gift," IMO.
Fair enough, Sue. You are right. "Gift" can have the meaning you intended and be in line with the facts.
ReplyDeleteOne thing I have noticed about the political factions in Greensboro (and even the world) - they keep repeating their "line" and eventually it becomes fact.
ReplyDeleteThe park was created with private funds, and made available to the citizens of Greensboro. That's what I meant by "donated." I don't really see it as a loaded word, or a party line, just a statement of fact. Yes, the ownership of the land beneath the park may mean that a better word could be found to describe the legal status of the park, but I'm comfortable enough with "donated" in the vernacular usage. You are welcome to discern any agenda you wish, but I would urge you to go relax in the park instead.
ReplyDeleteAre you talking about Center City Park or the ballpark, Ed? Center City Park was created with and is maintained with public and private funds.
ReplyDeleteBTW, have you been to the newly donated Wendy's on Battleground? Donated in that it is being "made available to the citizens of Greensboro."
"BTW, have you been to the newly donated Wendy's on Battleground? Donated in that it is being "made available to the citizens of Greensboro."
ReplyDeleteYeah, but the city doesn't pay for the Wendy's upkeep/maintenance and it'll be 100+ years before that site could support a skyscraper.
-Hugh
A portion of sales tax collected in the Greensboro Central Business District, as well as 5% more in property tax accessed on property in the CB is used to maintain the park.
ReplyDeleteAnd, I think that the city, in addition to sidewalks, paid for the fancy new street lights around the park.
I'll have to admit that the cement park is not as bad as I thought it would be.
But, I still think that the real purpose of it was to sell the Wachovia Building which is even uglier now than it was before.
Sorry, but I'm still stuck on "intellectual heavyweights".
ReplyDeleteI keep re-reading the post looking for clues, but for the life of me I can't find any intellectual heavyweights mentioned.
Just to clarify among us "intellectual heavyweights," (a term I'm sure will be bandied about with malice aforethought for a while), I said Ed's use of the word 'donated' was "unfortunate." Not having talked to Ed in several weeks and being woefully behind on our cabal planning, I should have clarified that his use of the word was unfortunate because there has been historical brouhaha about the Park being "donated." In the rigid or dictionary meaning of the word, I grant you that the park was not "donated." The land is privately owned.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I think Ed's as right as I am (for whatever that gets him - or me) that the Park is a gift given to the people of this city. It's beautiful, relaxing, and a positive addition to downtown. Tremendous amounts of money and time were also "donated" to the Park's planning and construction. It's not a fast-food restaurant and the comparison is a little too much word-picking for me, but have at it. You're entitled; I'm not claiming "rightness" about a word.
I'm happy to take my dogs to the Park as it's one of the only places in the City I can take them (besides Lowe's and the Bark Park).
hell sue you live right across the street from one of the biggest areas to walk a dog in greensboro in brown bark park as i called it since i lived there for over 18 years
ReplyDeleteI'd like to amend my earlier comment, to make clear the agenda I do hold: I'm strongly pro-park (not just this one, but parks in general), with a special fondness for fountains.
ReplyDeleteDiane's description of CCP as "concrete" sells it short -- it has expansive fountains, well-tended grass and trees, tables and benches, etc. It is a pleasure to visit, and does great things for downtown. As a Parkist, I find this park to be a gem.
Also, I'm a fan of creative philanthropy and lively downtowns. In these regards, CCP was a masterstroke. It ties the Cultural Center and Festival Park (and the museums and library behind them) to the Elm Street corridor in a way that is aesthetically pleasing and in the public service.
If it indeed helped spark the renewal of the old Wachovia building, which had sat empty for 16 years, then that's enormous bonus. Diane may have preferred the vacant tower, but I'm pretty sure that's a minority view.
So my biases are now out in the open. I like it not because it has Action Greensboro's fingerprints on it, but because it works really well, it's beautiful, and, yes, it was in large part built with donated funds. Hurray.
Greensboro deserves better? Greensboro got better, no matter how a few people nit-pick it.
"Why do we in Greensboro, even among our intellectual heavyweights, have such a hard time facing the facts?"
ReplyDelete--Because old people are to stubborn to learn anymore. To proud to say "wow, I never thought of it from that point of view."
--brandonB