Editorial: Rethink city parks restriction

Last month the Las Vegas City Council passed a resolution designating Ethel Pearson, James Gay and Fitzgerald Tot Lot parks in West Las Vegas as "children's parks," restricting their use to only children and parents or guardians who accompany them. The City Council adopted the new policy after area residents said they aren't using the parks out of fear. The problems at the parks include the selling of drugs and a growing number of homeless men who hang out there and drink alcohol during the day. The frustration felt by parents is understandable. After all, no parent wants his child subjected to these conditions. While the City Council's goal is laudable, there are serious questions being raised about whether the means the city is using are reasonable to make the parks safe.

As the Sun's Erin Neff reported last week, homeless advocates and civil libertarians have criticized the policy, which the city says it has yet to enforce and will do so gradually. An advocate for the homeless, David Buer, believes the policy singles out the homeless, who have few places to go now because there are a lack of shelters during the summer. The American Civil Liberties Union also is worried that the plan discriminates against seniors and young black men who might want to use the parks, but will be unable to do so because they may not have a child with them. "They are general purpose parks," Gary Peck, executive director of the ACLU in Nevada, said. "They are paid for by the public and should be accessible to the public."

While it's good to see the City Council concerned about the welfare of children, its solution goes too far. Under this plan, an elderly man who has lived here all his life, and dutifully paid taxes, could be denied entry to one of these three parks simply because he doesn't have a child with him. Are the elderly supposed to stay cooped up in their homes or, in the alternative, forced to walk long distances in the heat of the summer to enjoy the shade of other public parks that don't have restrictions?

The answer, it seems, isn't putting up a blockade that keeps out people who are obeying the law and are being penalized simply because they don't belong to a particular demographic group endorsed by the city. The best solution is enforcing the ordinances and state laws in existence that prohibit drinking in public parks and ban drug sales. The city's goal should be to make the parks safe for all Las Vegans -- not just those who have children.

archive