I appreciate the information clarifying the issues at Morse-Kelley, thanks very much for that report!

As for the City park planning team, I think they are very good also. Where did you read me having a negative attitude towards these staffers?

The issues I raise are not in the hands of the staff that work so hard and do an excellent job; generally, for the least pay. The buck stops at the top, where decisions are consistently made to defer barrier removal activities for another day, despite the fact that we have millions of dollars annually, via the Community Development Block grant funding, to plan and implement necessary architectural accessibility retrofits, and invest in future social sustainability.

Sorry for the delay in responding to this, but your comments on Morse-Kelley have been bothering me for some time. While you may believe that Morse-Kelley is “pristine”, the people who actually use the park do not share your view. A large contingent of young people from Save Our Somerville showed up at the September l7 city meeting that was held to seek input on the redesign of Dickerman and Morse-Kelley, and they care very strongly about this park. The last time the park was renovated, the budget available was small and improvements were limited. Basically, the southern basketball court was moved east in response to complaints from people in the abutting house, who were being driven nutty by the basketball standard next to a bedroom window. The tot lot in the northwest corner was removed, on the theory that people could use the then new play equipment in Dickerman instead. A bizarre gazebo with a perforated roof and awkward seating was installed in its place, possibly a gesture in response to requests for a place where adults could sit. In addition there were some cosmetic changes intended to reflect things of interest to the neighborhood, and a couple trees were added. The young people were very upset about the moving of the basketball court because it turned out that this wiped out a long-cherished stick ball game. One woman spoke about the problem of eliminating the tot lot: Dickerman may be close, but there is a steep slope between Dickerman and Morse-Kelley which is enough to dissuade some people pushing kids in carriages from going to Dickerman. The youths spoke out about the perforated roof of the gazebo, which offers no shelter in rain, and I don’t think anyone likes the gazebo. The young people very much want some facility for skate boarding and are angry that new dog runs have been created while skate boarding facilities haven’t been created.
I am also uncomfortable with the negative attitude you take toward the city park planners. I have lived across from Dickerman for close to thirty years, I attended all the public meetings for the last renovations of Dickerman and Morse-Kelley, and I have spent time studying small parks in Cambridge and Somerville. In my opinion, the current city park planning team is the best we’ve had.

best wishes to you and your family!

Thank you so much for this story! It is my son who fell and is spending an additional 4 weeks in this cast. I will state that there are other kids on our street who are afraid to go to the park on Walnut Street because they think what happened to our son will happen to them.

The city needs to take some responsibility in making sure all parks are safe for kids. This particular park is used by children 7 years old and under. Also, the fact that the water sprinklers spray water all over a portion of the rides is ridiculous. It makes the steps and slides unsafe and kids can fall and get hurt.

Thanks so much!

However, this City plan alone is not enough to derive conclusions regarding Somerville’s overall compliance with CDBG regulations. The City’s HUD annual Action Plans and Consolidated Plans are supposed to be based upon community needs assessments, and in coordination with public participation. Perhaps we residents have not sufficiently seized our civic privileges – and simultaneous responsibilities- by providing the City with written and public comments to its HUD drafts regarding genuine on-the-ground community conditions and needs.

Relevant to CDBG-R spending, Federal restrictions include:
prohibitions on expenditures related to construction of buildings for the general conduct of government,
political activities,
purchase of equipment, and
operating and maintenance expenses.

Other CDBG restrictions include:
bans on assistance to recreational facilities that serve a predominantly higher income clientele, and
general promotional activities for the grantee.

It sounds like your friend might have a solid case on which to bring a lawsuit against the city for her son’s injury. I wonder if the city weighed the financial and legal liabilities for surface materials when they selected the brick pavers? This sounds like another short-sighted decision at the expense of public safety.

Thanks for all the wonderful photos and common sense suggestions! I hope the city takes note of this.