Dear Issues List, Well, it has been a week. I have calmed down a little. Kind of ranted in the last e-mail and thought I would be a little more thoughtful this time. My apologies.
Just wanted to respond to a couple of the e-mails that I read over the last week regarding the Superintendent selection of the Minneapolis Park and Rec. System on this list. First Brian Melendez's comments were thoughtful, and are greatly appreciated. He offers a fair assessment of the situation. I do have to comment on some of Tony Scallon's comments: Tony Scallon writes, "The negativity of the comments on this forum about the Park Board Superintendent decision shocks me. This is the reason I try not to comment on the forum very often." "The two best candidates withdrew, one possibly influenced by the actions and attitudes of a commissioner. The failure of the process HAS AT LEAST is as much to do with the complaining commissioners as any of the majority." Now we have attacks on Gurban's reputation and the reputation of the = Minnesota Recreation and Parks Association. Shame on this negativity. I have found process criticism often masks other goals. Is the process issue really a stalking horse for different candidate?" Process is not more important than a qualified candidate." John Erwin Responds, I suspect, Tony, that if a group on any board that you participated on pulled this type of action, i.e. picking a candidate out-of-the-hat without your knowledge or any interview process or background information, that you would be incensed and not have positive things to say about it. The process, contrary to the comments of a Commissioner on the prevailing side, had not failed. It is public information that all of the 7 semifinalists received votes after their 1st interview. When the 2 with the highest vote count withdrew, we simply should have had another straw ballot to determine if any of the remaining semifinalists were acceptable. There were several EXCELLENT candidates and I know that 1-2 would have risen to the top and we would have interviewed them. THERE WAS NO FAILURE IN THE PROCESS! With respect to Commissioner Mason's comments to the paper, I would point to Commissioner's Dziedzic's comments in the paper where he supported Vivian Mason's right to voice here opinion and questions. I too support her right to represent her constituents. We were going to select a Superintendent based on a 1 hour and 10 minute interview with the finalists! Both Vivian and I reported to the press that we would like another opportunity to question the 2 finalists before a vote - frankly, this seems completely reasonable to me. As far as the reference to a "hidden stalking horse", is it so hard to believe that some of us simply wanted to pick the best possible candidate in an open process with the public informed and all commissioners participating? Incidentally, I supported the same people in the first vote as Comm. Hauser. Bottom line is that a group of Commissioners pushed through a candidate of their choice who had not applied or interviewed. I may have supported this candidate, or not . . . don't know. I simply knew nothing about him and refused to vote for him for that reason and because we were in the middle of a search process and still had great candidates. Why wasn't the motion to allow the candidate to interview, and then allow us to select the best candidate? Tony Scallon writes, "Important issues are being forgotten. For example, the Park Board has taken over the school police liaison program. Unlike Minneapolis police, they have refused to serve the neediest population of students in Alternative Schools and Charter Schools. The Mpls Park Police Liaison unit will not even respond to an offer to hire them for dances. I have not heard a response in months. Our students are as important as "the process." Please go back to work and help our kids!" John Erwin responds, We will move on, but the selection of the Superintendent is arguably one of the most important decisions that we make. It deserves discussion. In fact, we have only had 9 Superintendents in the history of this system. As far as the police in the schools issue, I agree. You are 'right-on' Tony and we have to figure out a way to get additional support to police the Charter schools as well. All the kids in Minneapolis should have a safe environment in the schools. Staff also should have called you back with a reply. Tony Scallon writes, "It is time to stop the negativity. I believe the Mpls Park Board needs to move on. A strategic planning activity as suggested by Ken Bradley would do a lot more for our residents than continuing the negative comments and accusations." John Erwin writes, I believe it is wrong to make any personal accusations of the John Gurban based on hearsay. It is not appropriate. I just met John for the first time last week and will base my impressions on my experiences with him. I also agree that we should have strategic planning and retreats and need to get along. That requires enough respect between Commissioners that they are willing to change. Secretly picking a Superintendent does not bode well for those on the prevailing side though! For the record, I do not believe that Commissioners Kummer or Hauser appreciated that there were enough votes there to continue the process with 2 more candidates. Call me na�ve, but I still have hope and support for them. John Erwin City-Wide Park Board Commissioner REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
