Monthly Archives: August 2004

Park Board Meeting

Regular meeting, 5:00 to 8:00pm scheduled time, including:

5:00pm — Recreation Committee
5:20pm — Planning Committee
6:00pm — Regular Meeting
6:30pm — Administration and Finance Committee

Agenda documents for the 4 above portions of the meeting in Microsoft Word document are available here.

** 5:30PM **

Public Hearing for Victory Memorial Parkway Master Plan

Staff and design team recommendations for the master plan for the Victory Memorial Parkway (from Lowry Avenue North to Webber Park) will be presented.

Star Tribune: Crown Hydro Not Dead Yet

“Rejected by the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board and decried by riverfront residents, the decades-old hydroelectric power project proposed by Crown Hydro seemed dead months ago.

But the privately held company’s core leaders clung to their dreams and have outlined four possible routes to realizing their goal of building an underground hydroelectric power plant near St. Anthony Falls on the Mississippi River near downtown Minneapolis.”

‘The project continues, investors say, because of pure love for the endeavor and a desire to resurrect hydro power’s pivotal and historic role in developing Minneapolis. Then there is the great personal and financial investment they have poured into Crown Hydro.

“The stakes are getting higher and higher; the risks are getting higher and higher,” said Crown Hydro owner Bil Hawks. “There’s an awful lot of people committed to this project. We’re not in the position to go away. I’m confident this is going to work out.”‘

Superintendent Job Posting

MINNEAPOLIS PARK & RECREATION BOARD
PARK SUPERINTENDENT

(Starting Salary is in the low $100’s D.O.E.)

The Minneapolis Park & Recreation Board (MPRB) is seeking a highly skilled municipal executive and
parks/recreation professional to lead the City’s leisure, quality-of-life and cultural programs in the 21st
Century. The MPRB is recognized as one of the finest park systems in the country, and has its home in one
of the most progressive and exciting cities in which to live and play. Minneapolis, Minnesota has been
recognized nationally as “the Most Fun City” by Money Magazine, as well as the second best place for running
by Running Magazine. This active City is recognized as having the most bicycle commuters of any City in the
U.S. east of the Mississippi River.

The Park System has earned the Gold Medal Award and serves a population of almost 400,000 residents,
offering nearly 6,400 acres of land and water throughout the City, including local and regional parks, 22 lakes,
the urban forest consisting of park and street trees, playgrounds, totlots, triangles, two water parks, seven golf
courses, gardens and picnic areas, nature sanctuaries, 49 year-round staffed recreation centers, its own police
force, athletic fields and the only National Urban Scenic Byway in the country (the 55-mile parkway system
known as the Grand Rounds). The outstanding walking and hiking trails are as attractive as the scenic
waterfalls and the 22 lakes. MPRB operates with 600 permanent full-time and 1,500 part-time employees
with a $48.6 million operating budget and an average CIP budget of $14.5 million. The next Superintendent
will be charged with maintaining the high standards for this outstanding organization while managing the
changes associated with tighter fiscal constraints caused by the challenging economic times.

Requirements for the position include a minimum of a Bachelor’s degree in Parks/Recreation, Public
Administration, Program Management or related fields. A Master’s degree in similar disciplines is preferred
but not mandatory. Candidates should have eight to ten years’ senior executive management experience in an
urbanized setting and/or suburban environment where parks and recreation services are valued. Desired
backgrounds should include innovative/creative services orientation in highly diverse (culturally and
ethnically) communities, a strong background working closely with neighborhoods, arts and cultural groups,
special needs groups, non-profit foundations, citizen advisory boards and the general public, advanced skills
in community visioning and strategic planning process, and oversight of large-scale CIP improvement efforts
and complex budgetary processes. Interested candidates submit a statement of qualifications/interest, salary
history and résumé no later than October 8, 2004 to:

Andrea Sims or Jerry Oldani
THE OLDANI GROUP, INC.
10900 NE 4th Street, Suite 2030
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Phone: 425.451.3938 / Fax: 425.453.6786
E-mail: resume@theoldanigroup.com
http://www.theoldanigroup.com

STrib: Park Police Clamp Down on Skinny Dipping

Nick Coleman: Skinny-dipping? Don’t go there
Star Tribune, August 25, 2004

Sleep well, Minneapolis. Your police are on duty, busting naked people.

It happens every summer.

Last month, four women from Macalester College in St. Paul wandered over to Sin City to try skinny-dipping at Cedar Lake, engaging in an innocent rite of passage on an 80-something-degree night by swimming at Hidden Beach — a well-known den of nudity.

Innocence is always risky.

Most hard-core nudists — who have given the neighbors fits for years — know better than to skinny-dip on the hottest nights of summer, because they know the cops will be on the lookout for bare bums. So it’s the neophyte nudes who get busted. You pretty much have to be 19 to think you can get away with cheeky fun in this country.

The four Mac women learned a lesson in Minneapolis they will never forget.

It began when the astonished women watched from the water as a half-dozen police cars swooped down on the beach as if Saddam Hussein himself were taking a dip.

The boys in blue were shocked — shocked! — to find skinny-dipping going on.

I am not in favor of nudists running loose on the street. But let him or her who has not skinny-dipped cast the first sandal. When you think about what goes on around this place on a summer night — with 10,000 lakes beckoning — it’s amazing we are not a famous fleshpot.

We’ll never be, at this rate.

Luce Guillen-Givins, a 19-year-old from lakeless Arizona, had never skinny-dipped before. But on July 19, she was one of the four women charged with being in a city park after the 10 p.m. closing time and with being improperly attired. That last charge was a no-brainer, since the women’s clothes were piled on the beach when the Minneapolis Bod Squad roared up.

The Park Board clothing ordinance contains steamy language you may not wish to share with the kids: “No person 10 years of age or older shall intentionally expose his or her genitals, pubic area, buttocks or female breast below the areola … in or upon any park or parkway.”

Obviously, Guillen-Givins and friends — Layne Mullett, Sarah Small and Colleen Stockman — were in the buff. But it was dark and they were in the water, things that make skinny-dipping good clean fun. It wasn’t until the cops ordered the women out of the water and put them under the glare of lights that they felt naked and ashamed.

Skyways News: Elliot Park's money not enough

Elliot Park’s money not enough to keep rec center open
By Sarah McKenzie

Minneapolis Park and Recreation officials rejected a $2,000 donation from Elliot Park Neighborhood, Inc. (EPNI) earlier this month to keep the neighborhood’s recreation center open Aug. 16-29.

This is the second year park officials have shuttered the city’s 49 recreation centers for the last two weeks of summer as a cost-saving measure. Park wading pools remain open and several outdoor activities continue as planned.

Tom Reid, EPNI executive director, said the neighborhood group had tapped funds from the Whitney Foundation and the Best Buy Children’s Foundation to keep the 1000 E. 14th St. park shelter open for the two-week period.

“We are disappointed,” Reid said, who added EPNI will organize next summer to prevent a similar closure.

Mike Schmidt, a Park Board assistant superintendent who oversees operations and recreation, said the EPNI money was too little, too late.

“The money wasn’t adequate to keep the building open,” he said, without saying how much money was required. “The offer was much appreciated, but it came late in the game.”

Reminder: What the Board Said Gurban Would Do

Friday, January 02, 2004
CONTACT: Jon Olson, board president,612-230-6400
Ginger Sisco, Sisco Public Relations, Inc.,763-544-0629

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

MINNEAPOLIS PARK BOARD ELECTS JON OLSON AS PRESIDENT, JOHN ERWIN AS VICE PRESIDENT
Annual meeting draws crowd of 100

MINNEAPOLIS, MN … Friday, January 02, 2004 … The commissioners of the Minneapolis Park & Recreation Board elected Jon Olson as president of the board by a vote of 5-4 at its annual meeting this evening. John Erwin became vice president on a vote of 6-3.

The annual meeting drew a crowd of nearly 100. Though the annual meeting is not generally a regular board meeting, the commissioners voted to allow 20 minutes of open time so people in the audience could speak. All of the comments were critical of the process in December by which Jon Gurban was selected to serve a one-year term as interim superintendent.

Outgoing board president Bob Fine opened the meeting with what he termed clarification of misconceptions. He said the appointment of Jon Gurban as interim superintendent was done to “permit the dust to clear.” He said that this allowed someone who knew the staff and the system to provide leadership and direction during this time while the board reviewed and determined what direction it would take. (In the superintendent search process, the top two candidates withdrew their names from consideration.)

Fine said that Gurban will not make any changes in the system without consultation of the board. Gurban is expected to work on the park system’s master plan which has been stalled for some time. Fine asked board members to support the superintendent.

In further action in the meeting, the board decided by a vote of 6-3 to evaluate its current counsel, Brian Rice, by spring of this year with the intent to request that the counsel be selected for 2005 after a call for RFPs (request for proposals). Rice was selected to serve as board attorney for 2004 by a vote of 8-1.

SW Journal: Wirth House loses tenant by Michael Metzger

“FOR RENT: Historic three-story, 5,000-sq.-ft. 1910 mansion surrounded by scenic Lyndale Farmstead Park. $750 per month includes electricity, water, maintenance. Available Sept. 30. Call Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board for details.

If you’re thinking of calling the Park Board to snatch up that prime property with the petite pricetag, hold the phone. They’re not renting the place — known to generations as the Theodore Wirth House — to anyone just yet.

The current tenant, the Minnesota Recreation and Park Association (MRPA), is leaving the 3954 Bryant Ave. S. home at the end of September.

Michelle Snider, interim director of the MRPA, said the group is moving to Fridley, where it has secured offices offering “a long-term location plan for the next decade and beyond.”

She said the MRPA — currently embroiled in a lawsuit with Minneapolis Park and Recreation Interim Superintendent Jon Gurban — began its search for a new headquarters while Gurban still ran MRPA.”

“The house is a symbol of the city’s commitment to its famed park system — whose development is largely credited to Wirth, the Parks Superintendent from 1905 to 1935.

Succeeding superintendents used the house until the mid-1990s. In 1997, MRPA moved in.

Gurban said he’s not sure what will happen to Wirth House after MRPA leaves. In a memo to Park Board Commissioners, he wrote that staff recommended four possible options for the property:

– Make it part of an employment package for a future, permanent superintendent;

– Have Park Board staff use it;

– Find a commercial use; and/or

– Find potential community uses.

Joan Berthiaume, co-founder of the Minneapolis Parks Legacy Society, said her group, which includes Ted Wirth, grandson of Theodore Wirth, would like to create an interpretive learning center in the building.

“That house is the place in which every park in Minneapolis was either designed or redesigned. So the face and character of the city was really determined within that house,” she said.

Her group would like to highlight that history for city residents, especially children.

MPRA, a nonprofit group, has leased the house for $9,000 per year, or $750 per month, with utilities included.

Park Board commissioner Vivian Mason has long felt the deal was too good for MRPA, even though it supports parks and recreation professionals. “The Park Board did all the maintenance on the building, paid for all the electrical and the other utilities.”

Gurban — MRPA director when the group began leasing the Wirth House — said he simply accepted the Park Board’s deal.

“The MRPA is paying exactly the amount of rent that the Minneapolis Park Board requested. There was no negotiation on it. How the Minneapolis Park Board came up with that request for rent, I’m not sure of.”

Mason suggests that MRPA hasn’t even lived up to its end of an overly generous lease agreement.

According to a 1996 Southwest Journal article, Gurban said if the lease were approved, the MRPA would create a public historical display covering neighborhood history and a century of progress in the parks and recreation movement.

Said Mason, “They never did anything along those lines” and discouraged neighbors from using the building.”

“Gurban said told the East Harriet Neighborhood Association that it could display historical information about the neighborhood.

“They, of course, never came forward with any display of any sort,” Gurban said.” [a complete lie on Gurban’s part]

SW Journal: Byrn Mawr Park concept creates political storm — Scott Russell

“The Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board is developing plans to make Bryn Mawr Meadows a less intense, kid-oriented park and build a new Parade stadium in Lowry Hill, returning that site to its former glory as a citywide sports venue, said Interim Supt. Jon Gurban.”

“It seems an odd time to float a major new initiative. The Park Board, like most cash-strapped local governments, is struggling to maintain current services, let alone add new amenities.”

“The problem is, the community heard rumors of the plan well before it saw anything. It raised questions and touched the old neighborhood nerve.

BMNA caught wind that Park Board Commissioner Bob Fine had met privately with City Councilmembers to discuss the plan. It wrote the Park Board Aug. 3, reminding it of the neighborhood’s past opposition to field upgrades. It questioned how the plan fits with the area’s master plan or land use plan.

BMNA’s letter criticized Fine for excluding Commissioner Vivian Mason from discussions. Mason’s district includes Bryn Mawr and Parade. Her exclusion “has damaged the neighborhood’s trust” in the Park Board, the letter said.”

“Fine called Bryn Mawr Meadows a central city park that affects everyone in the city. “Why do I need to talk to her [Mason]?” he asked. “We work differently than the City Council. One person doesn’t own the whole district.”

Johnson said Fine asked her to set up a meeting with Councilmembers Lisa Goodman (7th Ward) and Natalie Johnson Lee (5th Ward), an effort to broach the future use of the city-owned land.

It appears he made little headway.

Johnson called the meeting “tense.”

Goodman, who represents Bryn Mawr and Lowry Hill, declined an interview request. She said it is not a city project.

However, in a July 23 e-mail to Mason and constituents, Goodman raised many concerns and objections to the plans.

Fine showed “audacity” in promoting a major proposal in Mason’s district without including Mason, Goodman wrote. The Park Board’s plan conflicts with other area plans. It is “unfunded” and “very costly.” She questioned pursuing a park expansion when the system lacks money for general upkeep.

Johnson Lee didn’t recall many meeting specifics, except that Goodman “pretty much reamed” Fine. “For me, it was not a relevant plan because it had not gone through any [neighborhood] committee process,” she said.”

August 18 Meeting Highlights

The meeting started at 5:00pm with the Planning Committee. Comr. Dziedzic is chairing it in Comr. Bob Fine’s absence.

** The first item of interest on the agenda was a report by staff on a proposed University of Minnesota rowing facility to be built on the east river flats, which the Park Board has owned since 1883, and had leased in the early 1970s to the University.

There is an approved master plan for a park on this property, designed around open space, open play areas and open vistas.

The original plans by the University were for a NCAA Women’s rowing team facility, and those were the plans which were presented to, discussed with and approved by the CAC (Community Advisory Committee, not sure). Since then, the University has doubled the size of the building (a 2-story flat roofed structure of fairly large size) to include a facility for the men’s rowing Club.

The University has not finalized their proposal to the Park Board, so this report was only a status report. The plans may change from those presented.

The lease arrangements have not been worked out, but there were a number of programs and scholarships proposed by the University, apparently as in-kind services in lieu of actual lease payments, including one rather strange item: a Polar Bear Plunge at Lake Calhoun.

Commissioner Berry Graves has some questions about those in lieu services. She is “insulted” by one overnight high school scholarship and is likewise insulted by another meager offer of only 3 slots in another such opportunity. She wants to see numbers for the actual number of children per clinic, activity, etc. will actually be accommodated by the University’s proposal.

Comr. Young is concerned about the appearance of the building, agreeing with some neighborhood comments about its extremely boxy appearance. She states the U has a good architecture school; why not hold a design contest? And if it’s going to have a flat roof, why not look at something like solar or green roof technology.

Comr. Erwin mentions he will have recuse himself from any votes as he works at the U but says this is a good opportunity to work more closely with U now and in the future, and that the U is likewise interested in doing that. He suggests among the items in the lease that the U be required to support 2 graduate student assistantships at the Park Board in perpetuity. He also suggests any redesign consider a more traditional boathouse such as might be seen at Yale or Harvard.

Comr. Hauser agrees with Berry Graves, Young and Erwin. Wants more city kids to benefit and thinks the building (computer drawing) is ugly.

Comr. Dziedzic says that due to Title IX, with 80 women on the NCAA rowing team and 95 men on the football team, the U really wants to do this project because it will help them meet the law. He thinks the Park Board can get a lot more from the U because of that incentive.

Comr. Berry Graves asks staff how and when did the change to include the men’s club get made.

Staff answers that the change was made right after the CAC meetings.

** Next item on the agenda was a presentation by CM Don Samuels and CM President Paul Ostrow on the two part proposal they have for getting the Salvation Army to choose Minneapolis as a location for Kroc Community Centers. [Background: McDonald’s hamburgers “heiress” Joan Kroc died and left $2 Billion to the Salvation Army for this purpose, to be divided up into $20 million “project grants.” At the last meeting, CM Ostrow presented a proposal for one such Kroc Center in Northeast Minneapolis adjacent to the Northeast Athletic Fields and Lupient Water Park.]

CM Samuels emphasized that what he was proposing was not an alternate to CM Ostrow’s previous plan, but a second half of a joint project for North Minneapolis, that is, 2 Kroc Centers in Minneapolis. His proposed location was the Jordan Park and Jordan School property along with about 13 houses to the east, in order to reach the 12 acre minimum required parcel size for the Kroc Center grant application.

Landing these centers will need to be a joint Park Board, School Board and City effort. CM Samuels says this is not a rivalry between North and Northeast, and that the Salvation Army has encouraged the city to propose both as a solution.

CM Ostrow says this is an incredible opportunity, and both Samuels and Ostrow ask the Park Board to partner with them, and support the proposal as outlined. Ostrow says the Salvation Army will provide $10 million in capital for building and construction and $10 in operating costs, but requires a matching $10 million to be raised privately. [total for such a center is thus a minimum of $30 million it appears.]

Comr. Erwin makes motion to approve the concept as presented.

Comr. Young asks how many houses will be torn down? Answer is 13. She asks if they have talked to the community about this yet. The answer is no, but CM Samuels discusses why he believes the sacrifice of the homes is worth it.

Comr. Young comments that it will cost $2 million plus to acquire and remove the homes. She asks CM Ostrow about homes at Northeast site. CM Ostrow replies by describing how Northeast has talked about a community center for years, but does not really answer the question, particularly in light of the size of a Kroc Center being so large.

Comr. Berry Graves asks about the use of the school and seconds Erwin’s motion.

Comr. Olson asks if the school board has agreed to use of Jordan school? Answer: No, but they have talked to a few of the board members. He asks if they have considered any other North Minneapolis sites. Answer: No, only Jordan Park/School site. Olson asks if Park Board will be partner in the programming. He also mentions that Salvation Army is a faith-based organization and the Park Board needs to know what they are getting into.

CM Samuels says Salvation Army will have a separate facility for worship services.

Comr. Hauser asks what commitment the city council members are asking the Park Board for. Answer: approve in concept the sites proposed, not just the idea of a Kroc Center. She asks who retains control of the land? Ostrow answers: it can be worked out.

Comr. Kummer asks what the property tax loss to the city is. Someone answers about $25,000 a year. [It seems it was a highly speculative, inexact guess to me.]

Comr. Erwin asks who will hire the staff? Ostrow answers the Salvation Army will own and operate the facilities, and thus will hire staff. Erwin says this may be a problem given the City’s equality-based hiring regulations versus the Salvation Army’s anti-homosexual policies.

Comr. Berry Graves calls the question. Says we have worked with faith-based organizations before, such as the YWCA.

Comr. Young says but the YWCA has an equality statement. She is very concerned about the Salvation Army owning and operating a facility on Park Board property.

Comr. Erwin amends his motion to move the North Minneapolis site to the North Commons in the event the Minneapolis School Board denies the usage of the Jordan School.

The Motion PASSES out of this committee.

** 6:00pm **

Planning Committee is recessed.

Regular meeting is called to order for Public Open comment time.

** First public speaker is Phil Duran of east 38th street. He is a representative of OutFront Minnesota, Minnesota’s leading GLBT organization. He wants a Park Board regulation regarding members of the opposite sex using restrooms to be revised to be in-line with a similar revision the City made to their regulation. The general wording is problematic for transgender individuals, as well as to others such as people who have opposite sex personal care attendants, and people with children of the opposite sex. Duran’s case is well prepared and he has legal information from the city’s change available. He is referred to assist. super. Mike Schmidt.

** Gary “Farland” (sp?) representing the ECCO neighborhood urges the Park Board to uphold and enforce the shoreland ordinance of the shoreland overlay district, designed to protect shore lines. ECCO has concerns about the Edgewater development. The ordinance says any development within 1000 feet of the shoreline must be no more than 35 feet high. Edgewater is 400 feet away, and they want to build much higher than 35 feet. They are asking for a variance. ECCO is opposed. The building will be highly visible, and he has some illustrations to show what it will look like from places around Lake Calhoun. He believes the ordinance should be upheld and Edgewater not be allowed to exceed the height limitation. He is referred to asst. super. Judd Rietkerk.

** Joan Berthiaume of the Minneapolis Parks Legacy Society describes the Society’s continued interest, support and backing for providing a public interpretive center to teach the public and especially children about this history of our park system in the Theodore Wirth Historic Superintendent’s House, and wants to be a part of the discussion for future use of the house.

** 6:12pm **

Regular meeting is recessed and Planning Committee is rejoined.

* Bryn Mawr Meadows planning update report by asst. super. Judd Rietkerk.

Rietkerk goes through the history of the plans, and pulls in all kinds of other plans, including former Superintendent David Fisher’s plans in 1998 to build more sports facilities in the parks, including the Ft. Snelling facility that exists today, the many and varied plans for Parade Stadium and the areas around it, the city’s north-south connector (Van White Boulevard), use of artificial turf in some of the mentioned locations, and an NFL grant used at North Commons and applied for at Parade. In 1998-1999, Brauer and Associates, Ltd. was hired and drew up plans for Ft. Snelling. In 1999-2000, the Guthrie announced it was moving, and that triggered the creation of new plans for Parade, created by Cunningham and Associates. Then somewhere in there, the City approved the north-south connector idea, but the exact location is not firm. This triggered the Park Board to hire Brauer and Associates again, this time to draw up 2 concepts for Bryn Mawr. Then there was a plan to use artificial turf at Parade Stadium. Then another contract was let to Ingraham(?) and Associates to evaluate Parade and Bryn Mawr due to the Guthrie moving to the riverside.

Much, much more detail about the various iterations of plans and NFL grants at North Commons and Parade, and the number of ball fields at Bryn Mawr, etc. were reported. Some plans emphasized softball, others emphasized youth soccer, still others had mixed adult/youth field usage. Other plans had a new stadium with Astroturf and bleachers built next to Parade and the ice arenas. There is also a plan for a banquet facility near Parade. The north-south connector has been moved since the 2000 plan. New road location resulted in having the consultants relook at plans. New plan supposedly emphasizes “quality not quantity” of sports facilities, including 3 adult/youth softball fields located on the current city impound lot. In the past 2 months, a consulting firm was paid $10,630 out of a “pre-planning” “slush” fund which had contained $303,000.

* Comr. Mason reviews the history:
— the Bryn Mawr plans were dropped several years ago when the city indicated it would not give up the impound lot and the rock crusher site (both on east side of Bryn Mawr Meadows).
— the plans were not ready to be presented to the board at this time.
— from her years of experience on planning and zoning commission, and as Park Board liaison to it in subsequent years, she learned that preliminary plans do not leave the Park Board without being marked as “DRAFT”. She has copies of the plans that Comr. Bob Fine presented to city council members, and they are not so marked.
— at least 4 commissioners had no idea the plans existed, that money was being spent on developing them.
— Bryn Mawr is in Mason’s district and Fine nor staff bothered to communicate the plans to her.
— Interim superintendent Jon Gurban initiated the discussion of the Bryn Mawr plans after a “dry run” of a staff presentation to commissioners, i.e. in their absence.
— Comr. Bob Fine “hangs around” the Park Board planning department and Rietkerk says this is how he learned about the plans which he then took to his meeting with several city council members to discuss.
— Mason was told the $303,000 “pre-planning” fund had $30,000 a year added to it until last year when money was short, yet she can find no mention of that expense, nor the fund itself in any of her many financial documents dating back years.

Comr. Bob Fine is not present, and Mason wants him to have an opportunity to explain to the full board what he was doing and why.

** 6:42pm **

Comr. Erwin says this situation could have been avoided with a few ground rules: etiquette for commissioner conduct, and the Board should be determining major new expenditures, not staff. He comments the Park Board is losing money on the Ft. Snelling athletic complex and he is hesitant to do it again.

Comr. Berry Graves comments that a reduction in the number of softball fields at Bryn Mawr, as per the most recent plan, is a bad idea. They are used intensively by adults. She also points out how mixing youth and adult field usage has been problematic in the past, and how the board has had a long term goal since 1997 of getting away from combined adult/youth field usage. She also has questions about whether the city will give up the land at the impound lot and rock crusher, and about putting kids recreation facilities on top of the known ground contamination in those areas. She wants the Park Board to set their own standard of pollution mitigation and not just use the minimum standard from some outside agency.

Comr. Young says the Heritage Park and Van White Boulevard discussions never included Bryn Mawr to her recollection. She has a number of concerns: (1) commissioners not talking to the district commissioner for the district that the plan is in, (2) talk about new development when we can’t even maintain the parks we have, (3) reserve funds usage, (4) wants a superintendent’s report at every meeting about what is going in the park departments, and (5) there are too many questions around this Bryn Mawr plan.

Comr. Olson says the board is not breaking ground at Bryn Mawr, but needs to look to the future. He believes people will support it because they need to recreate and get healthy.

Comr. Hauser asks if the artificial turf discussion mentioned by Mason was part of the pro-soccer discussion. Answer: No. Hauser thinks we need a lot more soccer fields. Hauser says a lot of words but not much of anything in substance, while playing the “it’s for the kids” card [a tactic used by a few commissioners to block off any criticism of a project
since of course, no one wants to “harm” the “kids.”] She is also worried about the loss of parking revenue from the Guthrie and about the cost of maintaining the Sculpture Garden.

Comr. Young says the issue is timing, disrespect to commissioners and a lack of reports from the superintendent. She asks what the deadline is on the NFL grant. Answer: mid September. Young points out that the land north of the Park Board HQ building (now becoming townhouses) was a lost opportunity because the Park Board did not have the money, and where will the money come from for this project?

Comr. Olson says NFL funds are for Parade, not Bryn Mawr.

Comr. Dziedzic says that staff [Gurban and Rietkerk] was taken to the woodshed tonight and he defends them, wants them to “stay creative” in spending money on project plans like this.

* Xcel’s Aesthetic Flow Plan Survey report by asst. super. Rietkerk. Staff has a number of changes they want Xcel to make to their survey which they want to use for deciding what an aesthetic flow (amount of water) over St. Anthony Falls would be. Park Board staff has a number of reasonable and intelligent suggestions on how to improve it to make it more representative of the public’s view as a whole, and how to keep it focused on the subject of the survey. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) apparently has something to do with this, as well, perhaps requiring Xcel to complete this survey.

Comr. Kummer comments on a previous Park Board resolution requiring some minimum desired flow over the falls, and apparently completely confuses the changes the staff wants to request from Xcel over Xcel’s survey to determine a “public” number with that resolution.

** 7:20pm **

Planning Committee adjourns.

Administration and Finance Committee, chaired by Hauser, is called to order.

* Item 7.1 asking that the board adopt a resolution requesting the maximum certified tax levy increase for 2005 (4%).

Comr. Dziedzic says that is 4% on top of full market value as limited market value is going away, along with the assessor raising the value of homes, and to keep that in mind during the budgeting process.

Asking for the maximum, can’t go above it, but can go below it.

7.1 PASSES.

* Organization Restructuring Report by Jeff Schoenbauer, a consultant from Brauer and Associates, Ltd., presented on behalf of Interim superintendent Jon Gurban. Schoenbauer has been working on this plan for 4 years. He says they are doing the “heavy lifting” to change the organization. His most key point of his 30 minute presentation is that the “plan had to be organization driven and able to stand on its own.” He clearly positions himself to continue in his role, and likewise positions current executive management of the Park Board to stay in place. Much of what he says sounds very good, but much of it is also standard operating procedure for any competent executive, and is well known in the corporate world. His descriptions are very much “buzz word compliant” and full of the emotional strokes that people need to hear to feel good about what they are hearing. He sells the commissioners on the big reorganization plan that has been developed. There is a lot of good and valid information and change contained within it. He outlines what the new management organization chart will look like with cross-discipline teams under 3 district managers, beneath 2 general managers beneath the superintendent, instead of functional “silos” which discourage communication and cooperation between employees in different departments. He talks about how employee morale has increased since Gurban rekindled interest in this reorg plan (remember, he’s been working on it 4 years).

A number of Park Board staff members then give their personal testimonials about how excited and positive they feel about the process and proposed changes, including Deb Pilger from operations, Jennifer Ringold from planning, assistant superintendent Mike Schmidt, Mary Lyn Pulscher, assistant superintendent Don Siggelkow, and Eileen Kilpatrick.

Consultant Schoenbauer says it will take 2 to 3 years from adoption to complete the entire reorganization effort. Once it is completely, then work on a Comprehensive Plan can be begun.

* Comr. Olson thanks Schoenbauer and staff, and support the re-org effort.

Comr. Erwin supports the re-org effort but says commissioners need to be involved early on in these kinds of proposed changes. Suggests a staff/commissioner retreat.

Comr. Mason supports the re-org efforts in all ways, and keeping the board in the loop is the one issue she has.

Comr. Kummer applauds their efforts and has a question about the 3 district map.

Comr. Young commends the staff and is also concerned about keeping the commissioners in the loop. Changes must be approved by the board.

Comr. Dziedzic holds up a sign that says “9.7”

Comr. Berry Graves says the plan needs discussion, in particular the 3 district arrangement.

Comr. Young moves acceptance of report and move plan to full board. Comr. Dziedzic seconds.

Motion PASSES with 2 opposed, Berry Graves and 1 other that I did not catch.

** 8:30pm **

[by this time, reporters from the Star Tribune and SW Journal were long gone and missed the following fireworks.]

Admin & Fin Committee adjourns.

Regular meeting is rejoined.

Comr. Olson calls for modifications to agenda.

Comr. Mason has a number of items, including those not addressed at the canceled meeting.

Olson gets into a heated discussion with Mason and Young about which items can be included, and which ones he is going to delay further by pushing them through committees.

Comr. Dziedzic comments “we will be here all night.”

Mason points out it would not have been a problem if the last meeting had not been canceled by a virtual boycott by 5 commissioners.

Olson disagrees about what the calendar said about last week’s meeting. Not all items get put on tonight’s agenda.

Comr. Erwin states that staff should have had the items on the agenda since they were brought up in the last committee before the full board.

Agenda approved.

** 8:40pm **

* Petitions and Communications

Commissioners described letters and petitions they had received, nothing earth shattering here.

* Reports From Officers — none.

* Consent Business. Fairly perfunctory approval of all items, including re-org plan, change to ordinance to allow liquor license at Calhoun Refectory (Tin Fish), and maximum levy.

* Superintendent Search Update by Mary Page.
1. Public Input at last meeting — Oldani Group’s Andrea Sims took copious notes
2. Recruitment draft materials sent to board for review
3. Contact with commissioners coming Thursday/Friday(?)
4. Time line — moved back 2 weeks with Nov. 29 suggested final selection date instead of first week of November.

Comr. Mason says all looks ok except the draft ad from the recruitment materials.

Comr. Dziedzic objects to the “turmoil on the board” phrase in the recruitment brochure, but Oldani will tell any serious applicant what the situation is.

Comr. Young says ad is lousy and the “turmoil” phrase needs rewording.

** 9:08pm **

* New Business

* Comr. Berry Graves discusses a letter to the board from People For Parks. There seems to be a staff memo associated with this referring to some problems with release of funds and a disputed problem that goes back 3 and a half years. People For Parks is a non-profit 501(c)3 independent organization which has raised money for specific projects in the parks with approval of the Park Board. The recent letter is asking for specific approval of 3 small projects in Longfellow Gardens for which fund raising has started. But staff wants to resolve the old issue about getting funds released to pay for work the Park Board did in the past and for which People For Parks was presumably going to pay.

Jim Parsons, current president of People For Parks is present and addresses the situation at the request of the commissioners. He describes some of the history of the situation, making it clear that he was not involved with People For Parks, having resigned, during the time the unpaid work was done, and that he only recently came back to the organization and became its president. He appeared at the last meeting of the Park Board requesting action on the approval of the 3 projects in Longfellow Gardens because [apparently] requests to the staff were going no where. And that is what he was prepared to talk about tonight. He had no idea that the issue of the past 3.5 years would be brought up and associated with his request.
[It seems to me that what happened is that staff, probably Mike Schmidt or at his direction, attached a memo to the letter that Parsons wrote when it was distributed to commissioners and the interim superintendent. It appears this memo outlines complaints about not getting paid for the historical work. It’s not exactly clear. What is clear is that there has been some sort of impasse between the Park Board and People For Parks for some time.]

Parsons makes a number of points about the actions he has taken. Parsons met with interim super. Jon Gurban and asst. super. Mike Schmidt regarding the 3 projects in Longfellow, and at that time Gurban resurrected the past problems. However, Parsons points out that at no time has the Park Board ever been able to put anything in writing quantifying the amount due and what for, that is, there have never been any invoices or documentation. Further, all of this was during a time when Parsons was not a part of the organization. Parsons wants the current project addressed, not held up while a problem which has not been resolved for 3.5 years continues to not be resolved.

Comr. Olson cuts Parsons off saying the hour is late.

Comr. Erwin proposes two meetings between the two organizations, one to address solely the past problem with release of funds for completed projects, and one to solely address the current proposed projects for Longfellow Gardens.

Asst. super. Mike Schmidt wants an agreement on past before moving forward, and wants details in 3 parts on new project before approving.

Comr. Olson asks if Parsons knows where the money is [money in People For Parks control].

Parsons points out that until February of this year [if I remember correctly], all of the accounting for People For Parks was actually done by the Park Board accounting department, but ultimately yes, he does know.

Comr. Kummer thinks the plans for Longfellow are great but didn’t know about the past problems.

Comr. Young states the board needs a working agreement between the two organizations. She suggests that comr. Kummer and asst. super. Schmidt be part of a team to negotiate such an agreement, cognizant of what the Parks Foundation is doing, as well.

Comr. Olson appoints comr. Erwin and comr. Kummer to take on this effort.

** 9:30pm **

* Discussion of the Park Police move to the HQ building:

Interim super. Gurban drones about the “memo of August 10 which addresses this” and apologizes for not being able to be at the August 4 meeting [where this issue came up]. He says it is a space situation [current police facilities are over-crowded] and that a “couple of commissioners had stopped by the office” and were “polled.” The plans for this move range from back of napkins to more. He formed a couple of “focus groups” to figure out the problem. He states no construction work downstairs in the HQ building has been done for such a move [several commissioners and members of the public heard rumors that such had happened].

Comr. Mason says that she has actually seen formal plans drawn up by an outside contractor for offices on the lower level of the HQ building for the Park Police. She wants to know the cost of the plans and the cost of actually doing the construction work and moving the police. Staff had told Mason that the work was to start on August 2 but did not know why it had not started.

Gurban says he is not prepared to answer those questions tonight but can prepare a report and answers. He claims he has always communicated the same information to all commissioners.

Comr. Olson defends Gurban’s activities.

Comr. Young is concerned about money being spent on plans. Where is the fund from which this money is coming? How much is in it? How is it being spent?

Comr. Dziedzic [agitatedly] states that he has been in elected office since 197? (198?) and has never seen so much disrespect to [agency] staff. He says if it happens again, “I’m gonna get loud.” Then he raises his voice and loudly and angrily says, “I’m gonna get real loud.” Dziedzic then continues to loudly and angrily relate, “I remember a fistfight at a school board meeting…” making a fist with his own hand.

Comr. Berry Graves interjects: “Is that a threat?”

Dziedzic [now bellowing and pounding the table with his fist] shouts, “That’s a fact!”

Meanwhile Berry Graves is repeating her question, Comr. Olson is calling for order, ultimately having to bang the gavel repeatedly to get people’s attention. There is a moment of pandemonium before quiet and order is restored.

Comr. Kummer says she thinks Gurban’s action is fine, it is what he should do to do his job.

Berry Graves points out that the question is not whether solving office space problems is appropriate but rather that the whole financial deal approved by the board for the purchase of the HQ building was built upon the idea that the entire lower level would be leased out to other organizations/companies so that the lease revenue would pay off the loan (mortgage) on the building. To then remove that lease income by moving the police into the building without board approval is the problem.

Comr. Olson says they will get the figures for the building from staff.

Berry Graves says this problem could have been avoided had staff communicated with the board.

Comr. Hauser defends the move of the police department, and says the idea of having the police in the new HQ building was talked about [informally] in the past [but was not formalized as the lease arrangement was].

Comr. Dziedzic gives his “second speech” as he puts it, about trust being a two way street [and another characteristic is also a two way street — was it respect? not sure]. He criticizes some elected officials without naming names.

** Meeting adjourns at 9:48pm **

Park Board Meeting

Regularly scheduled meeting.

Agenda documents in Microsoft Word format are available here.

Some interesting items on the agenda include:

1. Report on the Kroc Center (Salvation Army / Joan Kroc bequest) by Council Member Don Samuels. At the last meeting, CM Ostrow and commissioner Dziedzic lobbied for putting such a multi-million dollar center in northeast adjacent to the existing northeast athletic field complex and Lupient water park.

2. Report on plans for a large athletic complex at Bryn Mawr Meadows by assistant superintendent Judd Rietkerk.

3. Report on Xcel’s “Aesthetic Flow Plan Survery” by Judd Rietkerk. Is this a report that is supposed to show that Crown Hydro won’t hurt the appearance of St. Anthony Falls?

4. Adopting a resolution requesting the maximum certified tax levy for operating funds for the year 2005.

5. An update on the superintendent search.

6. A number of other interesting things, and always the possibility of surprise new business.