Petition: Sakai not being developed as promised

Supporters of recreational facilities at Sakai Park planned to attend the April 20 meeting of the Bainbridge Island Metro Parks & Recreation board en masse.

About 200 people signed a petition asking why the eight-year delay in action as Proposition 1 was passed in 2015.

The signees ask that parks publish on its website why the fieldhouse project has not moved forward. They ask for a special board meeting April 30. They want a fieldhouse advisory committee established by May 15. They want a detailed account of how the $1 million grant obtained for Sakai has been budgeted. And they want meetings to resume for the Sakai Park Planning ad hoc committee until planning is complete.

Some of the signees added comments on the petition.

“The athletic club purchased does not replace the need shown in the Sakai comprehensive plan. It is centrally located and easy to get to from schools,” Kjell Stoknes says.

Tanya Powers says: “Our island desperately needs new fields. Support the kids! They shouldn’t have practice until 10 p.m. on school nights because of limited turf.”

“The community wants action on Sakai Park since we voted to have the land purchased,” Dawn Snider says.

Alex Greene comments, “The island would be benefitted by more indoor recreational space in general, especially during the fall and winter months with shorter days and more rain.”

“In comparision to other neighboring communities our infrastructure for youth sports is incredibly poor,” David Johnson adds.

A youth sport interest workgroup says a multi-use sports facility at Sakai would benefit 8,000 youngsters. It says no lighted fields mean no outdoor sports after dark, and that facilities are inadequate for hosting tournaments that could be beneficial for the entire community, especially local businesses.

An agreement with the state in December 2021 says the property will support mixed-recreation uses, including natural open space near the pond and wetlands and active recreation elsewhere, such as courts and fields. An indoor facility could support gymnastics and an indoor field.

A survey shows 55% want an indoor facility, 45% a playground, 32% outdoor court, 26% picnic with shelter and 24% meeting rooms.

Adam Hunt is leading the charge, writing numerous emails to parks commissioners and distributing the petition.

The parks board intends to look at the issue May 18 at its 6 p.m. meeting at the Bainbridge Island Recreation Center. The staff will make a presentation, followed by public comment.

In an email, parks Commissioner Jay Kinney explains the park district did not move forward with an up to $30 million capital improvement project at Sakai Park because of COVID and cost.

“We do not have the funds in our budget to build a fieldhouse, and I do not think it is realistic to pass a bond since the school district is planning a bond measure of over $100 million.”

Kinney adds the parks board did the same thing to the swimming community recently when they asked for up to a $60 million bond for a new pool.

Bonds can be hard to pass, requiring 60% approval.

Since 2006, schools have passed $168 million for five bonds, fire district $31 million for a bond and levy, and the city has tried to pass a few smaller bonds that failed, Kinney’s email says.

“A fieldhouse, like a new pool, would be a great addition to our parks, and we would love to have it. Unfortunately, I think there is a zero chance of passing a bond for a nonessential project in the next few years given the competition from the school district for available tax dollars,” Kinney’s email says.

He adds that by acquiring BIRC and the planned lighted turf field at Strawberry Park the parks district has provided some options that were targeted for Sakai.

He said the park commissioners have planned capital improvement projects for the next four years: pool renovations, a dock replacement, tennis courts, building repairs, bathroom installations, mountain bike trails, a new turf field with lights, and more.

Hunt says it looks like parks wants to scale back anything done at Sakai. Hunt mentions the possibility of a recall, but “I’d personally much rather spend my time and energy on the solutions proposed in the Sakai Park Petition.”

Hunt questions the need for more public input when that was done so thoroughly years ago. He says professional facilitator Bob Linz had numerous public meetings where the community actually generated the Sakai plans.

“It seems disingenuous at best to insist on even more community input for the Sakai Park project while the board felt compelled to approve the BAC/BIRC without even a single survey,” he says of the $13 million purchase.

He says the parks district “has already commissioned and paid a firm $75,000 (or more) to develop the feasibility study incorporating 10 different needs/uses at Sakai Park, but the only one added to the Sakai Park property to-date is trails (and now perhaps possible consideration of tennis courts).

“I’m particularly confused by how BIMPRD can proceed with constructing courts on Sakai Park this summer absent holistic review of the entire property and the 10 previously identified community needs/uses.”

.

.