In his letter to the editor, the owner of the skate shop tries to convince the city council to remove the restrictions that were put down on skateboarding in Central Plaza by presenting two arguments. The first, that the littering and vandalism is still in existence even after banning skateboarding and the second is based on a comparison with Monroe Park, where skateboarding is allowed and there is no problem of litter and vandalism in that place. While the shop owner's arguments seem legit at first, but on careful examination one can see that the arguments are not cogent and there are some questions that must be answered before allowing skateboarding again in Central Park.
Firstly, the shop owner should answer whether the people who used to skateboard in Central Park are the same as those who skateboard in Monroe Park. It is possible that the people who skateboard in Monroe Park are decorous and don't litter or vandalise the property. If they are not the same people, there are chances that those who used to skateboard in Central Park will returns and start littering and vandalising the property again.
Moreover, it is possible that they are cleaning services employed in Monroe Park regulary. The skateboarders might still be causing damage to the property, but those damages are fixed. Maybe, the residents pool money to fix those properties. The shop owner needs to answer whether this is the cause of no problem of litter and vandalism. If this is the case, then significant amount of resources might be needed to fix damaged properties and thus opening up skateboarding may lead to expenditure on such services and the city council or neighbouring residents may not be ready for the same.
Also, the shop owner is overlooking the fact that even when skateboarding is banned, the skateboarders might be sneaking in at odd hours and causing the litter and vandalism that is still there in Central Park. That may be the reason for the problem that is still in existence in the Central Park. The shop owner needs to answer the question about who is littering and vandalising the area. If it is the skateboarders who do so, then opening up skateboarding again is not a very good idea.
Even, if the answer to all these questions points towards opening up skateboarding again, we should not overlook the fact the shop owner owns a skate shop. Maybe he faced a meteoric dip in his sales due to closure of skateborading. It needs to be answered whether the shop owner is writing this letter just to increase his sales or not. If that is the case, then the city council should not open up skateboarding.
Although the shop owner may be right and opening up skateboarding may not lead to a further increase in the littering and vandalism problem, but there are a number of unanswered questions that must be answered first before taking any decisions. Whether the same skateboarders are skateboarding in Monroe Park as Central Park? Are there any cleaning facilities employed in Monroe Park? Are there any ulterior motives of the shop owner? These questions need to be answered before making any decision.