|
Hello
Mpls Issues, I would
like to respectfully respond to the question about the infighting and rifts at
the Park Board. I have
heard and seen some of what is being referred to. I think part of the
problem is that some of those folks have been there for a looooooong time and
think that their seniority somehow dictates that decorum and decency no longer
hold sway. I think differently. I also think an infusion of new
blood (mine!) will be good for what ails the Park Board.
Here's
why: I respect
the voices of those who have served the park board for a long time. I'm
sure many of their constituents thank them for their service. I think,
however, there is a new constituency out there who wants to see the Parks and
established programs maintained, but who would like to see water quality
improved, pedestrian (and cyclist and stoller and doggie) safety increased, and
see the Park Board move away from politics of "EITHER - OR" and begin to adopt a
policy of "AND." Example
One: There is this notion out there that if one is for increased or
enhanced green space (ie fewer chemicals in use, sustainable forestry methods,
invasive species removal, shoreline preservation) that one is somehow against
children (and playgrounds, t-fall fields, sliding hills, and the community that
surrounds such activities/amenities). Absurd. Also: the notion
exists that if one is in support of, say, off-leash dog sites that one is
against children. Doubly absurd. This
notion that the parks' primary participants are families with children only
partly reflects our city's citizenry. Some of the current park
commissioners will fight (as I understand it) tooth and nail to make sure that
t-ball fields and basketball courts remain and are added wherever empty space
exists. I support organized athletics-- I played t-ball, softball,
football, broomball, and ice-hockey growing up and coached high school girls'
fast pitch softball. But kids in the age group of 8 to 13 are not our
only, nor main, group of folks in need of park space and programs. What
about seniors? What about new immigrants? What about singles?
Dog owners? Disabled folks? Teenagers? Families without
children, or who have children who do not participate in organized
athletics? What I'm
saying is that we need to look at our citizenry as a WHOLE, and be INCLUSIVE
whenever possible. As elected park officials, it is their (my)
obligation to represent EVERYONE. The current Park Board seems to turn a
deaf ear to many who are actively and vocally calling for new amenities, new
policies, new practices, a new philosophy. It will
be an uphill battle, and sometimes it's easier to pick and fight than it is to
make hard decisions and work for those who elected you. If I make it to
the Park Board, it will be my honor to think OUTSIDE OF THE CURRENT BOX and work
to make sure many voices are heard, not just the bickering inside the Park
Board. Tracy
Nordstrom Candidate
for Park Commissioner, District 6 ECCO -
Ward 10 ---------------------------------------- |
