Is Library Park dead?

Or is the City of Manteca just throwing in the towel?

Those are two questions that should be debated and answered openly before any elected official agrees to lease all or portions of the downtown park to a private concern whether it is for a destination food court or for a used car lot.

It is not a subject that should be addressed simultaneously with a deal to basically change the community pact, if you will, that led to Library Park coming to be in the first place.

A little bit of background.

The Library Park site was a city-owned weed patch adjacent to the old Southern Pacific train station for the first 30 or so years of Manteca’s existence for a reason.

It wasn’t close enough to the tracks for commerce.

It became a lighted baseball field with bleacher seating in 1936 for nearly 25 years.

In 1962 after voters agreed to bond for the first permanent home for a library instead of being in the corner of a store, someone’s home, or in small rented space, the park was created with leftover space on the municipal parcel.

It is when the sycamore trees were planted.

Library Park over the years emerged as a gathering place for small community festivals and such. That was in addition to its laid back status as a place to eat lunch, read a book, or just pass the time chatting on a lazy day.

Fifteen years ago, the city tried to up Library Park’s game.

It included removing part of Sycamore Avenue, expanding the park. 

In doing so, it allowed the adding of restrooms, an interactive water play feature, playground equipment, bocce courts, event gazebo, amphitheater seating, and murals.

It was a $1.2 million investment.

And it was supposed to take Library Park to a level where it would be a more robust gathering place to draw people downtown.

That was, at least, the objective as outlined by the City of Manteca’s Vision 2020 undertaking.

It was a 24-member committee the City Council appointed in 1998 to fashion -a vision for Manteca in the year 2020 touching on community amenities, the economy, and such.

The Library Park upgrade, transit station with community room, turn-of-the-20th century lamp posts and accompanying streetscape, and community-based mural project were the direct and/or indirect result of the Vision 2020 enterprise.

Things, shortly after the makeover was finished, started to go south in small steps.

Almost from the get-go, the restrooms became havens for drug users and people sleeping in the street.

Restroom vandalism and drug paraphernalia scattered about got so bad, then City Manager Karen McLaughlin had the restrooms locked up for close to two years. They were unlocked only for events at the park such as Christmas celebrations, farmers markets, and the street fairs.

The city — trying to save money by not having the water recycled at the interactive play feature — rendered it useless due to drought restrictions on such recreational uses that became permament.

Then the homeless started hanging out.

As astutely pointed out, they have every right to be there just like any other law abiding resident during hours the park is open.

Some started illegal encampments.

Meanwhile, city park maintenance crews were tasked with started each day cleaning the park that still included discarded paraphernalia.

It would be noted that there were issues with the homeless at Library Park for years, but no one really noticed. It included sleeping on the library roof, urinating and doing the No. 2 in landscaping.

Then two things happened.

First, was the  “siege” of the library courtyard at night.

Up to three dozen homeless would gather to sleep.

They’d leave behind garbage, vandalized light fixtures, and human waste.

It wasn’t uncommon for library employees to have to run the gauntlet access the building if city didn’t get to their daily cleaning chores early enough.

That went away with the installation of the wrought iron fencing to secure the courtyard.

The second — and  arguably a much higher visual — was the daily gathering of the homeless at the gazebo.

They created no more issues than anyone else using the park, such as small scale littering and such. But they were visible.

The park got a reputation as a homeless hangout, even though by then the city was getting a handle on most of the issues.

The opening of 555 Industrial Park’s parking lot for homeless services and city efforts to direct them there during the day and to sleep at night, greatly diminished the visual but the perception lingers.

The city’s next step in “saving” Library Park could be a tad overkill.

Especially given its historic combination of being a park and a community gathering place.

Yes, the city does lease city parks in the form of Big League Dreams and the golf course to private enterprises.

But neither were a public park to begin with.

BLD was excess land secured originally for land disposal of treated wastewater that was partially leased by a farmer to grow corn for dairy feed and another portion used as the police department’s firing range.

The golf course’s original 9 holes was the site of the city’s golf course and the clubhouse location was once the city dump.

Library Park was, and still is, the city’s first community park.

Yet, basically changing its use has never been debated.

This is a park when the city added playground equipment to in 2010, it was noted it was the only park available for neighborhood kids in the central district north of the train tracks.

Maybe no one cares.

But then again the city has never asked the public the question.

The city has been negotiating out of the public’s eye to make the park private.

They’ve dropped hints at what they have in mind.

In reality, there hasn’t been a full airing of whether Library Park should remain a true community space where access is not controlled by whether one spends money to do so.

Why not ask the question before one gets into negotiations on a lease conferring  private control of what was started as — and still is — a traditional city park space?

A destination food court clearly will change the character of Library Park.

It’s a park, by the way, because the community decided 90 years ago to come together to build a gathering place for all of Manteca, and not just those able to afford to buy a trendy food dish or the latest cocktail.

Then there is the question.

Why hasn’t the city called proposals from the general public to submit proposals to lease Library Park instead of skipping that and entering into direct negotiations with a specific party?

They may have their reasons but they should be shared at a public council meeting.

After all, this is not 100 acres to be developed as a family entertainment zone.

Library Park has been a community park at the heart of Manteca for 90 years.

This column is the opinion of editor, Dennis Wyatt, and does not necessarily represent the opinions of The Bulletin or 209 Multimedia. He can be reached at dwyatt@mantecabulletin.com