TERRACE YOUTHS want a skatepark built so they can have a safe hanging around their neighbourhood doesn't thrill some of ihe area
place to grind. But the prospect of having dozens of young people homeowners and business people.

A skater’s paradise

: Or a neighborhood’s nightmare?

By DAVID TAYLOR

A PROPOSED skateboard park to be built

near City Hall is in its final stages of plan-
‘ning. But some area residents and

businesses are concerned that the resulting
. congregation of youths could spell trouble

_ for the neighborhood,

City councillor Rich McDaniel has been

_ Working on putting a skate park together for

months now. He thinks the location is ideal,

"and he’s been pushing the project since its
. inception.

. “Js been a wonderful experience,”’
. McDaniel says. ‘‘I never dreamed that I
would get this far.’’

Buthe has. The park is now very close to
becoming a reality. And McDaniel says that
/ it is an example of how a community can
_ work together to get something accomplish-
ed.

“There has been absolutely tremendous
community support,’? McDaniel says. “‘A
similar park in Abbotsford cost $60,000.
Well, we're three-quarters of the way there
in donations. The cost of this park so far to
the taxpayer has been zip. ”

Right now, plans are in the works to pro-
vide engineered drawings to the city from a
local engincering firm. Rough drawings of
the park are already available, and they’re
getting a thumbs up from local skateboar-
ders.

And they ought to be.

The design was a result of nine weeks of
consultation between McDaniel, sponsors,
citizens and the skateboarders themselves,
« The group has been meeting every Tuesday
« night to discuss the park’s progress,

The skaters have even formed a North-
.- west Skateboarder’s Association, which so
: far has over 80 members. They have also

started a skate park fund to help their dream

come along, Members are organizing a

bottle drive and they will canvass door to

door for several weeks.
“These are the nicest kids,’’ says
.*McDaniel of the youths, ‘They zeally want
:to be involved. And every meeting’s dil
ferent. I’ve had green heads, orange beads
‘and even multi coloured heads show up.

But they're always polite and they don’t

curse or swear.”’

However not all residents are as pleased
“as McDaniel.

Joe Durando owns a house right next to

‘the proposed park. He is concerned that
building a skatepark might invite trouble,

- “Pry thinking that the kids will be reliev-

- ing themselves on my property,” Durando

‘says. “But they tell me that they will build

¢ a fence to take care of that.”’

- Durando also says he is worried about
drainage problems that could result from

, paving the lot. However, McDaniel argues
that the park is being professionally
engineered for drainage.

“They tell me that everything will work
out,’ Durando says. ‘‘I hope so. It seems
that everything’s been decided now
anyway, so there’s nothing I can do.””

Some area businesses have also voiced
concems about possible vandalism to their
property.

’ Qwners of the Terrace Bowllng Alley say
‘ there’s never been any damage to their
_ building before and that any future damage
., will be blamed on the skateboarders.

” They are also worried the park will col-

‘tect garbage, pop cans and candy bar wrap-
. "pers.

They do, however, concede that the park

ie

is a good idea — just don’t put it next to
their property.

McDaniel disagrees with suggestions that
the farmers market lot be paved to double
as a Skateboarding park.

“That's the most unrealistic thing I’ve
ever heard.” he says. ‘‘A skate park is nota
parking Jot. It would not work.””

And he’s not worried aboutsa lack-iof:
washroom facilities at the skatepark either,
pointing out that many ball parks and tennis
courts in the city don’t have washrooms.

“The location is ideal,”?” McDaniel says.
“Everything is right there — the police, the
fire department, everything.”

But having the police only a stone's
throw from the park isn’t especially com-
forting to Blair Pytot, owner of neighbour-
ing Kalum Tire. He says that he recently
had his shop burglarized.

“We just had a B and E and lost $9,000
worth of tires,’ he says. ‘‘I’d like to have a
fence put up to deter thieves.”

Pylot points out that people are always
walking through his back Jot and pushing
tires around, sometimes rolling them down
the highway. He thinks the problem will
only get worse if'a park is installed.

“I’m not saying that all the kids are rif-
fraff,”’ he says. ‘But it’ll bring more rif-
fraff for sure,”’

RICH MCDANIEL

One business person who ceriainly isn’t
worried about the park is Tara Valk of
Ruins Board Shop. Valk says that there are
public washrooms available at the nearby
McDonald’s, and she insists the park will
be kept clean,

“The kids can’t skate over garbage,”' she
says.

Valk is the head of the Northwest
Skateboard Association, She argues that the
park won’t just be for skaters, but that it
will be a place where young people of all
sorts can hang out — helping to keep them
out of trouble.

“It's a safe environment,’’ she says.
They're out of traffic, off the sidewalks
and out of the way.”

Valk says she’s pleased with the way the
park has been progressing, and she credits
McDaniel for getting the project near the
groundbreaking stage.

“Rich has done wonders,’? she says.
“He’s done all the work soliciling
businesses for donations and organizing
everything. He’s been just great,”

According to Valk, building a skatepark
will be nothing but good for the city in the
long run.

“These kids are going io grow up,’’ she
says. ‘Do we want them to grow up bitter
and alicnated or do we want them to grow
up fecling like part of the community?”'

:

CO eicctnicecanticaccn ]

SKATERS JUST want to have fun. And “tight now
they have to roam from parking Jot to parking lot in
search of fresh asphalt for a smooth ride.

The Terrace Standard, Wednesday, August 28, 1996 - AS

Comment

Gov't creates
thought police

By GERALD PORTER
FOR THOSE who appreciate the blessings of free
speech and the torments of a free press, imagine
the following happy scenario unfolding in your
home town:

You speak out passionately at a rip-roaring Town
Hall meeting, get reported in the paper, and then find
yourself hauled up before a Tribunal whose politically-
appointed members are armed to the teeth with powers
to fine and silence you — and ihey do, for your
politically-incorrect ideas. It’s even worse for the
newspaper and the feckless reporter who quoted you.
Sound crazy?

Welcome to the brave new world of British Columbia
after Oct. 1, when the newly minted Human Rights
Commission opens its doors. And while the above
scenario is admittedly dramatic, it will be possible un-
der the expanding powers and mandate of the new
commission — powers no body of political appointees
should have in a democracy.

This Orwellian scenario should also explain why for
more than (vo years the B.C. Press Council has urged
the provincial government ‘o repeal controversial
changes to the Human Rights Act, changes the press
council firmly believe are unnecessary, unconstitu-
tional and a genuine threat to free speech and a free
press in this province, Your free speech, your free
press.

This bizarre tale starts back in June 1993, when the
provincial government made scemingly minor amend-
ments to the Human Rights Act, changes that alarmed
newspapers because it looked like the government was
trying to sneak in press controls through the Human
Rights Council’s back door. “No, no,” said the
government, from Premier Mike Harcourt on down,
“you've got itall wrong,’

But two years later it appeared we didn’t. In June,
1995, the government passed Bill 32, another Human
Rights amendment, which gave draconian powers to a
beefed-up Human Rights Commission and established
the tribunal to wield them.

So, why is the press council, the self-regulating body
of 127 B.C. newspapers, so concerned? Because the
new Human Rights Act in B.C. gives the tribunal (read
government) the right to harass and punish newspapers
and journalists for doing their jobs; the incredible right
to lay complaints against people who say or publish un-
popular opinions without waiting for a member of the
public to comptiain (a new ‘improvement’ since 1993)
— and then turns the felons over to its own tribunal to
judge.

What criteria will the tribunal use in judging? Noth-
ing less than those seemingly minor amendments made
.to the.act under Bill 33.

In Bill 33, by simply adding the words ‘‘publication”’
and “statement?” to the discriminatory publication pro-
vision in Seclion Two of the Human Rights Act, the.
government effectively included newspapers for the
first time. Premier Harcourt said he did it because fed-
eral hate laws didn’t go far enough, although they
clearly do and his government knew it. The new Sec-
tion Two also expanded the definition of what con-
stituted hate. ]t was now a crime, a thought crime, to
“publish’’ or utter any ‘‘statement’’ that ‘‘indicates
discrimination or intention to discriminate”’ against
anyone or a group, or that

s “‘likely to expose a per-
Son or a group... to hatred
or contempt because of the
tace, color, ancestry, place
of origin, religion, marital
status, family status,
physical or mental dis-
ability, sex, sexual
orientation or age of that
person...””

When the press council
asked: Just what did
“likely to expose” or
“intention”? lo expose
incan?, the government said it didn’t know but it would
let the Human Rights Council decide, a body now
empowered, incidentally, to levy crushing fines against
offenders.

The press council also looked askance at another
“tminor’’ change to the act, the removal of the provi-
sion that said “‘a person may, by speech or in writing,
frecly express his opinions on a subject.’ That, as
much as anything else, left a clear impression that the
government was prepared to run roughshod over the
spirit of the Charter of Rights (Article Two of the
charter guarantees a free press and free expression) in
an effort to enforce an unconstitutional law that had
one overriding objective — 1o harass and penalize
those with “‘politically incorrect’? ideas, including
those wha merely publish, sell or display other
people's views.

That impression was confirmed in June 1995, when
the government passed Bill 32, which sct up the new
tribunal and anned it with the powers of a mini-
Inquisition to seek out and punish the politically in-
correct, or maybe just people the government doesn’t
like.

Late last year, press council chairman Robert Yanow
asked the Attorney General to consider amending the
act to exclude the news media from its sweeping provi-
Sions. He also asked the government to reinstate the old
‘free speech’’ provision, and wrote that the press
council ‘would even be satisfied with a reference to
the Canadian Charter, as this would indicate that the
provincial government respects those freedoms most
cherished by Canadlans."’ Freedoms generations had
fought and dicd for.

Dosanjh answered: no, no, and no; tla which Yanow
replied: ‘I cannot understand why your government
conceives that it must stand by legislation which is ob-
viously unlawful.’’ But the answer seems clear.

No government in its right mind would want the
people to know it had just created a thought police
armed wilh clubs, and certainly not during an election
year. That's why you haven’t heard much about it from
the government, but you will, in the fall, when it opens
its doors for business.

(Gerald Porter is Executive Secretary of the B.C.
Press Council.)

“Premier —_ Har-
court said he did it
because federal
hate laws didn’t go
far enough, at
though they clear-
ly do and his
government knew
ij ad