[OKC] Core to Shore

[Jennifer Gooden]

There was a lot of discussion about Core to Shore on the OSN listserve
over the weekend.  For those of you who were following it, I have copied
my response below.
 
-----------------------------------
I regret that I was away from email over the weekend and am only now
catching up on the many Core to Shore emails.  As president of
Sustainable OKC, I'd like to comment on the conversation.
 
I was once told that effective social movements have three components:
the system, which includes government, business, law, and others with
resources; the protesters, who make the issue visible; and the bridge,
which is the moderate voice that generally identifies with the protestor
but can speak the language of the system.  This idea is applicable here
in the Core to Shore conversation.  Sustainable OKC is working very hard
to be the bridge.
 
To be clear, Sustainable OKC in no way advocates for the destruction of
Union Station or its rail yard.  On the contrary!  The best thing for
the sustainability of the city would not include building another
massive highway, particularly at the expense of rail.  But taking an
all-or-nothing stance means that we miss out on some opportunities.  
 
Sustainable OKC is not directly involved in Core to Shore, but there is
some overlap in people.  I personally have become involved for a couple
of reasons.  When I look out and see people being bullish,
confrontational, and negative, I feel sorry for the state of affairs in
Oklahoma City.  I want to create a place for people who seek more
cooperative alternatives to get involved.  I also believe we have the
opportunity to make some wonderful gains in sustainability by working
with the city on this project.  The Core to Shore process now has a
Sustainability Task Force, which is making recommendations about land
use, affordable housing, storm water runoff, green building, and other
strategies.  This is an opportunity that we would have missed if we had
responded confrontationally, as others want us to.  With a more positive
approach, we have opened up dialog and encouraged the discussion of
sustainability with city government, and this is a positive development.
 
I think the underlying context of this conversation is about world view.
Sustainability is a big movement that encompasses a lot of interests,
topics, and tactics.  The flip-side of having such a big tent is that
people inside will disagree; that is to be expected.  The world view of
this discussion has placed Core to Shore in the context of good and
evil, with good guys and bad guys shooting it out, and plenty of
conspiracy theories to boot.  I don't see it that way, though, and it
contradicts my experience.  It's not an issue of good and evil - it's an
issue of different people with different interests trying to plan for
the future.  Granted, some interests are seeking money, but some are
trying to make the city a better place, and others are involved to
advocate for sustainability, quality of life, and concern for the poor.
A good guy / bad guy approach glosses over the complexities of the
situation.
 
The presentation on Wednesday night (www.sustainableokc.org/calendar/)
will provide an opportunity for people to learn more about the Core to
Shore planning process.  The presenters, Russell Claus and Hans Butzer,
are great partners in sustainability and will have a lot of information
to share about this project.  
 
Jennifer Gooden
Sustainable OKC President
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sustainableokc.org/pipermail/okc-sustainableokc.org/attachments/20070716/d54d7a3b/attachment.htm>