I've been studying the MPRB closely for over a year - since I read that
liens had been filed against parkland at The Fort LLC project, Neiman
Center. I've read meeting minutes back to mid-2001. Clearly, there are
serious management problems at the MPRB.
Though not an official member of either park reform group, I am a park
reform person this year - as are most of my neighbors and the majority
of DFL delegates in my precinct, 9-7.
We, the voters and taxpayers, cannot blame MPRB staff or hold staff
accountable. We can only hold Commissioners accountable.
For the most part, MPRB staff is just great! Many are career civil
service employees who have specialized in recreation, forestry or
whatever and they have served under many elected boards and several
commissioners. If you've volunteered on a rec council or neighborhood
group serving as rec council, then you know that the local park
directors do all they can to assist volunteers including sharing budget
info and creating opportunities for volunteers to add to park offerings
and finances. If you have served on an environmental committee, like
Powderhorn's Save Our Lake!, you would be bowled over by park staff's
work to educate concerned citizens, share data and research, involve
citizens in making choices, and explain projects down to the details of
watershore plant mixes. Throughout the system, we have experienced
supervisors that regularly work with inexperienced young adults and
train them to do things like build docks or deliver specialized rec
programs. If you've ever worked for a contractor doing MPRB work, then
you know that the contract office puts out high quality plans and bid
documents and routinely ensures that taxpayers receive top quality work
at the best price. We are blessed with great staffers at the MPRB.
I know some in the park reform movement see GM Siggelkow as a negative
force in MPRB operations at the top level. But truly, all we can assume
is that GM Siggelkow has been and is doing his job per the directives of
his supervisor, the MPRB superintendent. If Mr. Siggelkow's job
description were to change to focus on developing relationships with all
City neighborhood groups, park rec councils, business organizations and
environmental groups, I suspect he would be as zealous in accomplishing
this as he is in performing his present duties.
So, is Mr. Siggelkow's supervisor, now Supt. Gurban, to blame? Again,
the voters and taxpayers can't hold Supt. Gurban responsible for he
reports to the MPRB Board. As far as we know, Mr. Gurban is doing his
job per the direction of the MPRB Board President and per the wishes of,
at least a majority, of the MPRB Board.
We, the MPRB taxpayers and voters, can only hold the Commissioners
accountable. We elect them - they represent us. Tonight, it is up to
the Commissioners to hear staff recommendations and to request more
information, as needed, to understand and eventually approve the MPRB
2006 budget. This is a Board duty - not a staff duty. It is up to the
Commissioners to ensure that the budget information is shared with the
general public (for it is all public information) in an understandable
format. I truly hope that Commissioners in both factions support
sunshine or transparency in the MPRB budget process and direct staff via
the Superintendent to provide this data. It's good government and it's
the law.
There's an election coming up - a time for the voters to hire and fire
our representatives, the MPRB Commissioners. I know Liz Wielinski will
be at tonight's meeting and is likely to post minutes per her bias -
this election year, it's called a "reform" bias but in the history of
local government, it is truly a "good government" bias. So,
Commissioners, again, it is up to you. If there are five votes to
'rubber stamp' the staff recommendations and shut down those
Commissioners who ask for more information, there will be more
suspicions of insider deals and information, of being anti-good
government. And such a process will provide more fodder for the park
reform movement very close to the election!
BUT, we are talking about $60-$70 million that embraces skating rinks,
lifeguards, clean water, athletic field quality, combating Dutch Elm
disease and all else that the the MPRB does. So, I am hoping the two
factions will delay until after the election and work together, as much
as they can, for the best possible 2006 budget in a process that the
general public can see and contribute to. We don't have to wait for
elections to get a better park board.
Sincerely,
Shawne FitzGerald
Powderhorn
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In an amazing plot twist in the Park Board drama, we now have the general
manager of the Park Board tell Commissioners that is totally inappropriate for
Commissioners to want to review a line item budget.
"It is not and never will be your job to figure out how much money to spend
by specific account or line item for the Minneapolis Park and Recreation
Board."
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:mpls@mnforum.org
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
