There has been a lot of discussion of the incident at Pearl Park related to
Jason Stone's passing out literature and the Superintendent's response.
There is also a noticeable hush from Commissioners. . . First, I would like
to say that I was not at the Park and did not witness the event. However, I
would like to make a few comments:
The issue of a review of our own policy regarding politicing in the
recreation centers was requested by Comm. Young at our last meeting. I
assume because she had concerns about what she can or can not do herself in
her own campaign. At that time, our District Manager Mr Hokeness stated our
policy - I have not seen this policy in written form. My recollection of
the policy presented at that meeting as it relates to this issue is as
follows:
1) Political Parties/Campaigns/Candidates may use rooms in
Recreation Centers other than the gyms free of charge and may pass lit
within the room but no fundraising (fee if room is used outside of regular
center hours or for gym). The candidate must reserve the room for that
purpose.
2) At festivals and celebrations the candidates may purchase a
booth or table and can distribute literature but may not freely wander the
crowd handing out campaign materials.
To be honest, I was a little surprised at the policy myself as I regularly
saw campaigning occurring during neighborhood meetings when I ran for office
4 years ago in Rec Centers myself as well as in festivals. People (City
Council and Board candidates) routinely passed out buttons, sign up sheets
for lawn signs and so forth in parks. So the policy raised a couple eye
brows among sitting Commissioners. During the meeting, I recall that Comm.
Young was surprised as well and I leaned over to her and suggested that
she/we consider changing the policy. . . I believe this would have happened
over the next month or so anyway.
Personally, as Recreation Centers/parks are public buildings/facilities, I
believe that campaigning should be allowed to occur as long as it does not
disrupt the scheduled activity that is occurring, i.e. ball games,
neighborhood meetings, etc. This is what occurred in the past, and there
did not seem to be any problem then. Imagine that would be the case now.
The Commissioners/Board are responding to concerns over this policy and yes,
the Board's Council, is studying whether the policy is in conflict with
established law. To think that we are not concerned is wrong. Regardless,
I imagine there are at least two Commissioners (me included) who think the
policy should be rewritten and is not appropriate.
With respect to Mr. Gurban, the Superintendent has responded to concerns
over his actions and gives an account of the incident on the Minneapolis
Observer. It is the Superintendent's role to carry out Board policy. In
this he should not be blamed. The policy was reviewed just 7 days before at
a Board meeting. Part of the outrage over this should be directed at the
current Board although many of us were not aware of this policy ourselves
and were surprised last week when we heard it! What Board wrote this thing?
Not the current one.
But I do have three comments related to the incident at hand aside from the
fact that the policy should be reviewed and rewritten ASAP:
1) Mr. Stone knew this policy as he was at the last meeting and heard the
discussion and proceeded to violate the policy anyway. Suggests that this
may have been an effort to use the policy as a campaign issue to gain
political visibility. Valid tactic. But he was aware of the policy and
people should not think that he was completely surprised.
2) The whole incident could and should have been handled differently. Three
officers was excessive. There are plenty of other things for three officers
to do than to all respond to a lit drop violation! In addition, I did not
hear of anyone talking with Mr. Stone as to who to call or how to change the
policy if he did not agree with it or to address the current incident
immediately - i.e. call other Commissioners.
3) There is the perception that all these officials raced to the site to
harass Mr. Stone. Not the case. They were all there for a scheduled
meeting that they were going to attend anyway. From what I know, Mr. Stone
was asked to comply with the policy no less than three times by Park
representatives. I also note that he was not ticketed.
Bottom line is that the policy needs to be rewritten, the situation could
have been and should have been handled differently, and the candidate knew
of the policy prior to the incident but proceeded to violate the policy
anyway.
Sincerely,
John Erwin
MPRB At-Large Commissioner
REMINDERS:
1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If
you think a member is in violation, contact 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 Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn
E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[email protected]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
