Science Center Is Right Choice For Voters Now

From what I can tell, voters in Spokane won’t be casting a ballot Tuesday on who created the universe.

A recent letter to the newspaper, however, suggested otherwise.

In explaining why they would be voting against locating a science center in Riverfront Park, Steve and Debbie Dunham wrote:

“Our children will leave the center full of ideas that the theory of evolution is fact and that they did indeed evolve from a slime pool millions of years ago.”

“They will learn there is no God who created them, and our moral code that is based on the Ten Commandments is no longer relevant to them.”

I checked the Ten Commandments again, but alas, they still don’t include, “Thou Shall Not Be Paranoid.”

I sometimes wish the tablets could be expanded.

Too many of our current discussions in public life take on unearned and unjustified dimensions as referendums on earth and sky, good and evil, and the darkness that lurks within the souls of either the rich or the poor.

Ancient grievances get mixed into a culture of endless complaints. The sour result is a crazy salad of people’s worst fears dressed with whatever issue is before the public today, in this case, the science center.

“Honestly, the Pacific Science Center just doesn’t get into things like that,” said Kate McCaslin, campaign manager for “Yes! Spokane’s Science Center.”

“They teach principles of science. Creation is not a topic they even engage in.”

Kids might figure out the speed of sound as it travels from the front of the church choir to the back pew, or how much energy it takes to move a 100 pounds of clay.

But that’s it. No slime pools.

This propensity to link our concerns from other parts of life to specific public votes could be the death of Spokane’s science center.

Polls show the vote is close.

While not all opponents will agree that the science center will work against the Ten Commandments, many opponents seem eager to endorse other unsubstantiated theorems of a grand conspiracy that can be molded into their personal fears or frustrations.

Ah ha! The science center will add to the cost of government.

No. The center needs no new taxes and is designed to pay for itself once built.

Ah, but wasn’t the science center all cooked up in secret by power brokers downtown for their gain?

No again.

The park board and Spokane City Council decided to pursue this idea as a way to preserve Riverfront Park. The officials have held a dozen hearings and open meetings about the center beginning in 1992.

And, oh yeah, all city residents get to vote on the idea in about 48 hours.

But what about the rides, or moving the center to a different location?

Well, the rides are worn out.

And the whole idea here is to use the science center as a way to enhance the core of a city’s premier park.

That’s what we’re voting on.

Not the rides. Maybe someone will come forward to save the rides, pay to refurbish them, or find land for them. Maybe a citizens’ group will form. That’s fine.

But the rides have little to do with the science center.

They are a side issue.

A whining sound sometimes rises from those who are focused on the rides. They say they aren’t being heard.

They were heard. And they were reminded that the rides are a side issue.

Supporters of the science center don’t mind the vote. “I agree with having a vote,” explained science center campaign chairwoman McCaslin. “I trust voters will do the right thing.”

If voters will listen above the din about conspiracies and nonresponsive government, their ears will hear parents, teachers and ministers saying Spokane needs more activities for kids.

If voters will tune into their fears about MTV, gangs and the decline of our youth, they will hear a voice saying this city had better provide some alternatives.

“If you want to have positive alternatives for kids, this is it,” said McCaslin. “It’s hard to believe a kid who goes to the science center and starts dreaming about a cure for cancer will give a whole lot of thought of how to join a gang.”

Even when voters listen to complaints that government needs to be cut back, the science center sounds good.

For 18 years, the Seattle’s Pacific Science Center has operated in the black. Now, that management expertise is willing to come to Spokane, build a first-class kids center in our park, repair our dilapidated Expo ‘74 buildings and then assume all the risk for paying for construction and operation.

We get the science center, we get needed repairs in Riverfront Park without a tax increase, and we get to downsize and privatize a portion of Spokane’s city payroll.

This is a conspiracy?

No, this is a chance to do the right thing.

, DataTimes MEMO: Chris Peck is the Editor of The Spokesman-Review. His column appears each Sunday on Perspective.