An editorial on May 28 involving the future of Strawberry Plant Park (and Blakely Harbor Park) concluded with these questions: “Should we keep it like it is, preserving and retaining the human footprint? Or should the money available be used to return the areas to a reasonable facsimile of its natural habitat?”

In actuality, those questions had been answered in favor of shoreline restoration and became even more official later when the City Council approved more than $200,000 in matching funds for both projects. Most of the money is coming from Wyckoff creosote facility’s Superfund settlement funds, which can be used only for restoring island waters that were compromised by pollution. Essentially, the proposed Strawberry Plant Park project wouldn’t exist without that money, which can be used only for such tasks as removal of riprap, fill and concrete that will eventually help bring the shoreline and intertidal habitat back to life.

There is a public process under way, but it is a quasi-public exercise. It already has been decided the park will be passive in nature to ensure that the environment is allowed to recover after years of industrial use. City and parks planners will tell you that the public will have ample opportunities to weigh in, beginning with a “design charrette” that’s being held this Saturday from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. at City Hall. The event, however, is essentially an invitation-only event with no public notice posted. Invitations were sent by mail or email to neighbors, stakeholders and others who support “specific site opportunities and constraints.” The mayor, council and park board also were invited, but with room for only 25 non-staff invitees it’s obvious that the meeting is really not meant for the “public.”

It’s all legal, of course, regarding public meeting law. A charrette is a common tool for planners to get input from community members who already have a stake in a project, especially if its basic purpose and direction have been decided. Strawberry Plant, for example, is going to be a passive, neighborhood park where the footprint is minimal and access to the water is restricted to uses like rock-skipping and picnicking. There are still some decisions to be made regarding recreational uses, but they will be made in regard to the constraints already put in place.

There’s nothing wrong with a park that allows comfortable public access to Eagle Harbor, especially on an island where such access has always been scarce. Presumably, most people would welcome it, but there are other points of view that deserved to be heard early on – even if the suggestions were not a good fit. Open dialogue should always be part of the process.

If you’re a boater, as it stands now, forget about using the park. Or how about a co-op wood and metal shop or a primitive haul-out facility as some people have suggested? There’s no doubt such endeavors are worthy, but they don’t fit today’s water-use concepts. Yes, the site used to be industrial and its remnants recall that past, but the types of water-related projects that draw grant funds these days indicate that times definitely have changed.

What is frustrating is the facade of open public interest that many of our public employees and officials espouse while they are manipulating the process in a way that allows them to do what they want. In this case, the city invites a specific audience and has the gall to consider it a public gathering. Yes, public comments will be allowed later during the permitting process, but will anyone truly be listening to those who disagree with them? Doubtful.

No wonder people are so disheartened these days by their government.