Karen Collier writes: 

"The money to (clean up the lakes) came primarily from the federal
government and from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. (South Mpls
residents) are taxed by the Watershed District. Therefore, to use the
cleanup of those areas, if in fact you were, as an example of money which
should or could have gone into north and northeast Minneapolis is a little
bit of a stretch."

Federal money is not monopoly money. Last time I checked, north and
northeast residents also pay federal taxes. And I believe the latest lake
clean up, for Lake of the Isles, is being substantially funded by state
monies to which we all contribute. 

There is a Middle Miss Watershed Mgmt Org that will be using taxing
authority to improve water quality in the river. This organization was
basically a paper organization for nearly 20 years, thus depriving the upper
river corridor of needed attention to river quality issues. Now that it is
up and running, the taxes garnered from our properties will begin to address
our needs. However, we also will need subsidies outside the city, as does
the south side. 

The point is, the Park Board has not placed as high a priority on funding
water improvement requests for the upper river corridor as they have for
south side lakes. When the Park Board made a request to the State
Legislature for somewhere around $7 million for Lake of the Isles, some of
us asked why a similar amount was not being requested to address erosion and
revegetation for the upper river. We are not suggesting that south side
lakes be abandoned. We just want parity in funding requests and project
development.

Scott McGerik writes:
"I, for one, am not convinced that removing the industrial scrapyards and
replacing them with a ballpark, in a park, is neglecting the river or the
historic or ecologically significance of the river. Rather, I see it as a
way to harness the value of the river in an environmentally sound matter."

What is the value of the river, and how do we define "environmentally
sound?" We have an opportunity in Minneapolis to redevelop our upper
riverfront as a model for how a river can be restored to pre-settlement
conditions as much as possible. The intrinsic value of the Mississippi River
is not as an entertainment venue, but as one of the most rare and complex
ecosystems in the world. Its significance goes well beyond the Third Ward of
Minneapolis. Harnessing its environmental significance will also bring
social and economic benefits without treating the river merely as the latest
real estate development opportunity. 

In 1993, the Upper Mississippi River Conservation Committee, a group of
river biologists from five Midwestern states, stated that there is some
documented evidence that the ecological collapse of the Upper Mississippi
has already begun. We can help reverse that if we seek the highest and best
use of our riverine area.

There may be neighborhoods that would welcome a ballpark in their midst. I
believe there are too many negatives to a riverfront location to support
such a proposal. Should it come to a serious discussion, I hope that
residents will consider what is good for the river first. 
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * *
F. Guminga
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to