SOUNDING OFF:City hall issue should be on ballot

I wonder if Tom Moulson represents very many of the Newport Center Park-only supporters in that he has apparently chosen to take the low road in this contest to determine whether or not locating the city hall in the park should be on the ballot, giving voters the choice (“Mailbag,” June 20).

In debating the issue, it doesn’t seem like a good beginning to question the integrity of the city hall in the park proponents by charging “gross deception.”

Moulson apparently doesn’t understand our city government and the checks and balances we have in place. Not in question form, but in a declaratory statement he says: “The intention is to replace the entire park area with a city hall — and cement.”

A more reasonable (and correct) interpretation of the proposed initiative, if approved, is that it would give the electorate the right to vote on whether the city hall should be located on the site north of the Central Library.

The intent of the “consistency” statement in the text of the amendment is to ensure that the City Council pursues any other necessary amendments — i.e., to the General Plan, municipal code, etc. — in order to facilitate the city hall in this location.

Of course, the City Council would be responsible for determining the size and design of a new city hall. The city’s view plane ordinance, which would limit the height of the city hall, remains in place, and the initiative would have no effect upon it whatsoever.

The idea behind Bill Ficker’s concept is to locate the city hall centrally in the city in the proposed passive park north of the Central Library. The city hall would use a small fraction of this almost 13-acre park, making the park much more usable and safe, and the city hall, park and Central Library together could have a great synergistic relationship. In addition, shared parking between the city hall and library would be very advantageous.

The reason for this initiative? While normally the preference would be for the City Council to make the decision, in this case we have a 4-3 divided City Council, and one vote could change the majority balance.

For such an important issue, it seems inappropriate that the vote of one City Council member makes this decision. Therefore, in this case, it makes good sense to have the voters decide the issue.

In a recent poll, when it was pointed out that there was a one vote difference on the City Council, more than 80% expressed a desire to vote on this issue.