A citizens group develops a set of priorities. No lagoon. Town budgets are tight; road maintenance and revenue need attention. Park water quality, sprinkler system and turf/tree health are ongoing problems not yet fully addressed. Town staff identify the need to secure a solid budget plan to “maintain what we have” before we venture into additional “stuff.”

Some town leaders take all this in and come up with adding a lagoon? Can you imagine the barrier that would separate this grand lagoon from the hazardous lake? Or having no barrier and children falling into the hazardous lake? Can you imagine wildlife “using” this lagoon since it will be much nicer than the lake water, and is in their living space?

If one wants a lagoon, would it make sense to place it where there is limited parking and no restrooms? Would a sensible person not think to locate this lagoon in the bay by the splash park, children’s playground, restrooms and parking area where typical lagoon users would tend to gather?

Nope, maybe we can spend a few million more on restrooms and parking in a new area. What’s a few extra million, anyway?

Someone commented about thinking outside the box. I can suggest we offer rocket rides to the moon to define Fountain Hills as a destination. That does not make it a good idea. We need leaders who think a little inside the box, considering resident needs and the reality of budgets.

Fountain Hills’ history shows that nice grass, decent lake water and shade trees are what brought people out to town to enjoy the park. Why is it we can’t learn from this? I suspect cleaning up the water, fixing the sprinklers and taking great care of the grass and trees is not flashy. Gotta add new.