I grew up in Kenmore, WA, a small city outside of Seattle that borders the northern end of Lake Washington. A few minutes from my house lies Saint Edwards State Park, a park with dozens of miles of running, hiking, and biking trails that go down to Lake Washington and back through dense forested areas. As a child I would come here often with my parents to hike and play on the playground, and as I grew older I would run here almost daily either by myself or with my high school cross country team. However, the fate of the park is uncertain. It is currently quite expensive for the state to maintain and is considering giving ownership of the park to the neighboring Bastyr University. This is a controversial move, and the advocacy group, Citizens for Saint Edward State Park fear a change in ownership will lead to more paved roads and parking lots, loss of jobs and housing for rangers, and complete closure of public buildings. I will analyze concepts outlined in chapter 8- nature, 3-markets, and 4-institutions in order to bring perspective into this controversy.
The social construction of nature helps to describe the connection people have with the park and why they fear change. Saint Edwards is a beautiful park filled with large, old trees with a discrete and picturesque waterfront; it is an easy place to love and find beauty in. This is also shown in that the Grotto at the park is a popular place for weddings and small summer concerts. However, outside the park stretches miles of Seattle suburbs and small cities. Saint Eds is a vision of the Seattle area before Seattle and the urbanization of the entire area, and there is no other park like it bordering Lake Washington. Because of this nostalgia for an earlier time and a pleasing aesthetic, people place importance in the park that is just a social construction rather than inherent value. Many people, myself included, have strong memories and attachments to the park as well, any many people fear change that could tarnish their idealized thoughts on the park.
Economically, St Eds presents an interesting dynamic. Originally the park was a Catholic seminary, and in the center of the park is the grand seminary building, but it is no longer in use besides by special arrangement. It is currently not kept up besides the dining hall, and while many people argue for its renovation, this would could upwards of $40 million. Additionally, the pool and gym were also put out of use in the past few years because the park could not afford to keep them running. Trading ownership of the park to Bastyr might help in that they may have more funds to upkeep the buildings better, but Bastyr also proposes to make use of these facilities strictly private. A possible solution would be to charge people an extra tax along with the Washington Discover Pass in order to use the park.
This controversy also brings up the question of institution and who should be in charge of this public, natural place. The state has control of most of the large parks in Washington, including St Eds, but they do not necessarily have the funds to be the best owners. Current prices to park at state park are $10 for a day pass or $30 for a year pass, but how do we decide what price people should pay to enjoy a park and how much should the state provide? Also there are questions of the boundaries of what constitutes a state park and how much say the citizens and users of the park have in the park’s future. I am not sure whether changing to private ownership would improve these issues, but it could. Or keeping the same state ownership, adjustments could be made in order to better fit the needs of the park and its users.
So what is the best owners for the future of the park? I am not sure. Perhaps because I am so personally connected to this park and my memories of it, I do not want to see more paved roads, parking lots, and traffic that Bastyr is proposing. However, the seminary and other buildings are currently just deteriorating, and someone with money to do so will need to maintain or replace them. The state of Washington currently has some great state parks, but needs to maintain or have the funds to maintain them better. Either party in control will need funds, leadership, and be able to listen input from the users of the park. Whatever St Eds becomes in the future, I hope to continue to be able to run on the amazing trails around the park and Lake Washington.
You say here that Saint Edwards park is “a vision of the Seattle” before urbanization. This social construction of the park that relates it to a time before there was much human activity is interesting, as this view seems to play a massive role in the debate about what to do with the park. Most people it would seem stand by the idea that the park must be saved because it is almost like the last area of true nature left in Seattle. The park itself has is only viewed in this way because humans chose to view it as so.