As a neighborhood President and member of three citizen advisory committees I spend time working on a wide variety of Park Board issues. I am an advocate for our Parks. I see what an important piece of our urban lives the park system is, and can be.
I think it is important to look at what the MPRB does well and what they do badly and why. What the Park Board does well tends to be ubiquitous and in the background and what they do badly is like getting poked in the eye with a sharp stick. My Park director has been fantastic in helping to coordinate and support an African Peace festival I have worked on for many years and many other neighborhood events. I appreciate the incredible talent and dedication of many of the Park Board staff I have worked with. That said it's probably better to talk about what needs to change than what doesn't. 1. Grassroots democracy and citizen participation 2. Attitude 3. There's no there there 4. Communication 5. Internal structure 6. Mission 1. The selection process of the Superintendent was an extreme and obvious example of how citizen participation is not welcomed, this is an organization that has Board members who argue with citizen's when they come to speak. ( and against charter rules for protocol) Citizen input is often an after thought after a decision has been made......: Porta potties, wading pools, closing beaches, Park headquarters, Superintendent, Marina, Skyline park/Baylor properties, etc. The public then reacts to decisions and policies that have had no public input. Public testimony is limited and only admitted if there is a prior arrangement with the board secretary. 2. The attitude that comes from the Park Board has been antithetical to garnering public support and cooperation with other public bodies. They have real problems with their major partners. I have personally seen the frustration and lack of cooperation in instances when the MPRB works with the City of Minneapolis, with CLIC and other funder/partners. Sure, there are legitimate disagreements, but much of the conflict is about the way the MPRB operates, not just about the proposals. Public perception really does matter. 3. Because of budget cuts and prioritization there are some key pieces of environmental operations that just aren't there. As an example, The lost capacity to take care of the urban forest in my neighborhood and the lost opportunities to seek outside funding are a real problem. Without better coordination, our urban forest will be replaced by thickets of the invasive Buckthorn that can not support a sustainable ecology- Increased pollution, loss of habit and loss of the economic benefit of flowers and trees that don't look like Buckthorn. It is my understanding that there is no line item in the Park Board capital budget for buckthorn removal. How can the Park Board maintain the properties they own? 4. I really appreciate the website and the wealth of information that is on it. But what kind of arcane organization has a majority of its board, and the past and present Board Presidents that do not have email addresses? I have had little success in using the phone mailboxes that are listed on the website. Citizen contact is made to be difficult. It is only recently that staff were available by email. I really respect Annie Young who has an email address and posts her home phone on the MPRB website. I also appreciate when Commissioners post and answer questions in this public forum. There was a plan to improve communications by having someone coordinate public information. That position no longer exists. So who coordinates PR? How do you get the information you need? Who should you talk to? Why do the annual reports lag two or more years behind the current year? Televising board meetings will help, but is there some reason meeting minutes are not available on line? I had to buy a tape cassette to get the minutes of the "Gurban" meeting. 5. Has anyone looked at the current structure of organizational silos of department structure and whether that really is the best structure for dealing with issues that are interrelated across different departments? Are the horticulturist, naturalist, and forester, working for different bosses? Who needs to determine what I can do on the Winchell trail? When I finally get permission to plant native plants on Park property, the maintenance guy from a different "silo" mows them down. Structurally if my Park director needs a different kind of soap in the bathroom she needs to talk to her supervisor, who talks to her supervisor that talks to her supervisor. She talks to her counterpart in Maintenance whose maintenance district is in district 4, but commissioner district is district 3, talks to her district manager who talks to the maintenance person about getting a different soap for the bathroom. In reality good staff find a way to get through bureaucracy. Some of why it is difficult for neighborhoods to deal with the Park Board is related to organizational structure. 6. The Park Board would get more support from the Public and its jurisdictional partners if there was more clarity and buy in to the mission. Much of the acrimony on the Board is related to differing views of the mission. There hasn't been a master plan in how many decades? The dynamics of the relationship of the Board and staff is very different from how the City Council works, which is why the selection of the Superintendent is the most important thing that is ever done by the Park Board Commissioners. The reason this is true is that Board Members set policy but historically most of what they do is approve staff recommendations. It's a part time job where they provide oversight. They supervise only three people, the board secretary, the board attorney, and the Superintendent. The Marina is an example of the problems of an unstated Mission and disconnect with citizen participation and jurisdictional partners. I am on the Phase 1 Task Force- the official Park Board citizen input mechanism for the Implementation of the Above the Falls Plan. At the first meeting the consultants told us how we were not here to look at how to make changes in the Above the Falls Master plan, but work within the existing framework of the thirty year Above the Falls Master Plan that was approved by the city of Minneapolis and the Park Board. But we have stopped meeting and are on a two month hiatus so far, so that Barr Engineering can do feasibility studies for a Marina that has never been part of the master plan and is not within the scope of implementing the Phase 1 planning. I am not speaking against a Marina and it is good to have information about feasability so that informed decisions can be made. But there have been thousands of hours by hundreds of people that have gone into upper river planning and specific approvals of a Master Plan which did not include a Marina. There are all kinds of projects that would benefit from bonding. How did the Marina project jump ahead of all other projects as a legislative priority? Especially since there is credible information about it being neither feasible or desirable at the Park headquarters location. Who is making this decision and what are the criteria that guides this decision? We need to have shared visions and goals. Horace Cleveland had the vision of our park system and Theodore Wirth brought that vision to reality and enhanced that vision. I would like to see many additional acres of parkland above the falls. To accomplish this we need a well run, well respected Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board whose mission and goals are understood and enthusiastically supported by the community. If this does generate some discussion, I am hoping we can look at some specifics of how this might work better for all of us. For example, if the MPRB is going to invest in moorings and utility connections in Bohemian flats for commercial charter boats that affect parking and traffic, this would be much better if the U of M and adjacent and affected neighborhoods were actually notified and involved in this project. Thanks, Scott Vreeland Seward 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
