The intervention by opposition municipal councilor Gaël Nofri regarding the municipal ‘skatepark’ dedicated to skateboarding and other sports has had a snowball effect.
Without wanting to interpret his words, or even less his thoughts, it seems to us that it is the issue of safety (real and not proclaimed) that he seemed to wish to address.
Now remains to establish the royal road to tackle all the issues: resolving them!
We all agree: Yes to skateboarding, no to nuisances!
According to Stéphane Robinson, President of the Nice Skateboard Association: “Once again at this back-to-school time, the recently opened skatepark is being questioned, simply because the city of Nice is unable to ensure the safety of its users, just two steps away from the House of Associations, the Municipal Pool, the tram terminus… In short, everything except a neighborhood outside the sphere of our cherished institutions…
We must remind Mr. Nofri that the site also hosts football players on the field adjacent to the skatepark. The site is not just a skatepark…
The issue is therefore rather: explaining to the people of Nice, and primarily to the locals, that the problem is not skateboarding, but the city of Nice’s willingness or lack thereof to ensure the minimum safety of the sites, whether it be skateboarding, football, swimming…
I remind you that this space allows many parents of young children in the neighborhood to also practice scootering.
Here we are at yet another questioning of the skatepark and the practice in Nice.
But why do things proceed normally in other cities
in France? In Bordeaux, in Annecy, in Aix-en-Provence, in Hyères…?
What is the problem with Nice? Is Nice definitively more comfortable with security communication than with the effective securing of the sites which are under its responsibility?
Will Mr. Nofri prevail? It’s an understatement to say we are eagerly awaiting the response from the city.”
Dominique Boy-Mottard, municipal councilor from the “Another Future for Nice” group, aligns herself similarly: “It’s not the skaters who should leave but the troublemakers,” she states.
To continue, “However, it is not a question of denying the problems: it is undeniable that the normal safety conditions for the young people who practice this sport are not perfectly ensured. While we are in a sector where multiple activities are practiced, while a House of Associations is adjacent to the skatepark (which also hosts young children practicing on scooters), while we are close to the terminus of Tram line 1, we would be right to expect more attention from the municipal authorities.
Some do not hesitate to talk about nuisances caused to locals. Being familiar with the neighborhood, I have not heard any outcry from the residents. But, if that were the case, the population must know that it’s not the skateboarding that is the problem but the desire to ensure a minimal safety of the premises, whatever activity is practiced. In most other cities of France that have a skatepark, things proceed normally, without facing particular problems.
Security communication is not enough to ensure the effective securing of sites under the city’s responsibility. Why have the mediators, once in function to everyone’s satisfaction, disappeared? It would be appropriate – and it would be the least – to plan their return. Because it’s not the skaters who should leave but the troublemakers.
