The proposed redesign of McEuen Field presents a puzzling abundance of contradictions and paradoxes.

For example, the mayor says that the Team McEuen advisory committee is a group of ordinary citizens. Yet she hand picked them all and nearly every one has a tie to City Hall, some of them paid staff.

The city claims that few people use the Third Street boat ramp or that it's mostly used by people from Spokane. Yet, the city is willing to spend millions of taxpayer dollars (that we don't have) to move the boat ramp elsewhere, replacing it with something "equal to or better."

Question: If no one uses the boat ramp, why is it necessary to replace it? Why spend more money on something you've already paid for?

Likewise, you hear the claim that no one uses the ball fields, or that they are a waste of space. Even so, there is talk of building a "world class" field elsewhere to apparently accommodate those ball players who, according to the city, aren't using McEuen's ball fields. That's more money spent on something that we already own.

The city claims that a majority of citizens support the changes and enjoy the Big Dream. Yet, they refuse to put the issue to a public vote. If they had the numbers as they claim, then why not hold a vote? I suspect the truth is that they don't have the numbers - and they know it, so they quibble the logistics of a vote instead of its outcome.

Then there's the ironic claim that "no one uses McEuen Field" but yet, apparently, everyone uses Tubb's Hill. People say that they walk Tubbs Hill three or four times a week. I assume many of those people get to Tubbs Hill by ambling across - you guessed it - McEuen Field.

Beyond these inconsistencies, the big issue I have with the McEuen proposal, and the millions of dollars Mayor Bloem proposes to spend, is that there hasn't been any proof demonstrated that the results justify the expense. Sure, everyone would love to have such a park, and the replacement boat ramp and ball fields. But where is the documentation from City Hall showing how such a tremendous burden on the taxpayer makes it all worthwhile?

I don't believe the people of Coeur d'Alene can afford this proposed project. Not at this time, not with such inconsistencies coming from City Hall. I would like to see local government focus on priorities such as lowering our cost of living and attracting career-level jobs for our citizens who would prefer a decent income over a fantasy park that we cannot afford.

DAN GOOKIN

Coeur d'Alene