Next Time, Run This by John Q. Public : Unilateral Decision to Resurface a Santa Ana Jogging Path Cried Out for Consultation

The jury has been out several times in Santa Ana on the classic theme of whether you can fight City Hall. One jogger’s campaign to improve a running trail--or more precisely, to see that the path is left alone--has already resulted in several summary decisions to change the pavement of a path in Santiago Park, a favorite of runners.

While the final outcome of the pavement saga remains unclear, it’s apparent that the public could be spared a lot of aggravation and that the city could save money spent for material and labor in repeated surfacing work if the two sides simply get together and resolve their differences.

A statement from the city on why a particular surface might benefit a range of trail users, and an expression of interest in serving the public’s recreational needs, would go a long way toward solving the problem.

So far, this has been a monumental example of breakdown in communication between local government and ordinary citizens.

One runner, Gerald Tiritilli, has already been around the horn at Santa Ana City Hall several times. First, he led a drive to have a covering of asphalt removed after it mysteriously appeared on the bare trail and received initial satisfaction. Several days later, the asphalt was gone, without explanation.

But recently he returned to complain about a second mysteriously installed covering of loose granite and was told that the new surface was there to stay.

Allen Doby, Santa Ana’s executive director of recreation and community services, said the paved trail was easier to maintain and provides better definition. But he made a statement that left a bad taste when asked why the joggers’ needs were not addressed. He said, “I don’t get involved with John Q. Public and with what they want.”

Perhaps there are some city workers who can get away with such a statement, but it would be hard to imagine many of the top-level officials to whom they ultimately report condoning that view.

It is no surprise, then, that the department’s assistant director reported last week that some surfacing would eventually be removed so the trail can be more comfortable for runners.

Moral of the story: City trails have to serve everyone, but users deserve some explanations on why changes are made. Parks employees should remember that when a runner takes off his running shoes, he puts on his hat as John Q. Public, taxpayer.