Seven candidates for Vancouver Park Board debated equity, facilities, parks and planning for density at the Strathcona Community Centre Association near the Downtown Eastside Tuesday night. In a freer format, in contrast to most of the electoral debates where questions are written and pre-screened, any audience member could voice any question from the floor.
The debate began with what the debate moderator Amanda Gibbs, the association’s president, called the biggest local issue: equity.
“Some kids here visit West Side community centres and say ‘why don’t we have that here?’ We are fundraising our asses off, but it is never enough.” She asked what the parties would do to spread park board funds to more needy areas.
Non-Partisan Association (NPA) candidate Casey Crawford agreed that public services vary too widely across the city, and “the local community associations know the area best, but this Vision administration wants to centralize control too much.” Vision candidate Naveen Girn suggested that aid to Strathcona could come from the $17 million emerging priorities fund included in the parks capital plan Vancouverites will vote on Nov. 15.
Green Party candidate Mike Wiebe said that other community centres, such as Dunbar, Marpole and Raycam are also suffering with “crumbling” buildings.
Gibbs said that Strathcona and some other associations have “an excellent relationship” with the park board. Yet some are battling the city in lawsuits for control. The NPA and Vision candidates pledged more “dialogue” and “consultation” on improving relations but gave no specifics when asked what the model for a new joint operating agreement should be. COPE candidate Imtiaz Popat was the most specific, saying his party would end the lawsuits and forge a new deal to make community associations joint owner-operators of the centres.
Some residents complained of pool closures, and pleaded for more to be opened. Others focused on parks. One woman said she had waited 24 years for a park to appear in False Creek where the developers had promised one to service a rising new population.
All the candidates agreed that one should be built there, but they disagreed on the process and what is a “park.” Girn said it is a “very complex issue” due to contaminated soil on the Expo lands and other logistical problems, and the city cannot force a private developer to create a park. The last claim was greeted with incredulity from the others. Wiebe added that a planned rooftop park for the Oakridge proposal does not qualify as a “real” park, while Shum said, “I live downtown and Yaletown Park is just one tree built in concrete.”
The candidates were asked to state their top two priorities. Their replies:
Shum, NPA: clean parks and to build a seniors centre in South Vancouver.
Crawford, NPA: a strong independent parks board and community centres, and more kids sports activities.
Coree Tull, Vision: more recreational centre access for those with barriers and more access to nature for kids.
Girn, Vision: good community action plans and building the seniors centre.
Ezra Bloom, COPE: more direct and transparent democracy, and funding for arts and culture from developers’ amenities.
Popat, COPE: better relations with the associations, and more community engagement.
Wiebe, Green: more access to nature, and local food production.
Summing up the event, Gibbs said, “I am heartened to hear that they are aware of the inequities in the parks system, but in the absence of a good joint operating agreement, it’s hard to know how to proceed on these issues. Our neighbourhood questions are complex, and I think they did their best, but many of the answers were too vague.”
