Another SW Journal piece.

Independent parks initiative heads to court


By Cristof Traudes

// The City Council rejected a citizen petition to ask voters in November to make the Park Board a fully independent body. The petitioners promptly filed suit. //


The initiative to make the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board a financially independent body has landed in court.

A citizens’ group representing a push to reshape the Park Board as a fully separate local governmental unit filed a lawsuit Aug. 28 against the city of Minneapolis, after the City Council voted 11-2 not to place a referendum on the Nov. 3 ballot. The group had just successfully completed a petition drive — gathering 17,046 signatures, of which at least 10,449 were certified — and the issue appeared headed to voters this fall.

But deputy city attorney Peter Ginder told the council that the group’s question could be unconstitutional. It’s not legal, he said, for one local government to create another.

In a 10-page memorandum, Ginder wrote that the petition could be rejected because the issue is preempted by state law and conflicts with state public policy. Furthermore, if the referendum were approved in November, the Park Board would still have to wait until the next legislative session before finding out exactly how their new body of government would operate.

“As the board sits today, they don’t know what they’re creating,” Ginder said.

Council Member Betsy Hodges (13th Ward) said several times before the council’s vote that its decision wasn’t going to be about the content of the petition’s question.

“The question before us is a matter of law,” Hodges said during an emotionally charged meeting. “It’s about law. … We’ve been told in no uncertain terms by our attorney that this is unlawful.”

The petitioners, represented by a citizen group calling itself Citizens for Independent Parks, quickly shot back, promptly filing a lawsuit against the city. They are hoping a Hennepin County District Court will hear their case and rule quickly so the issue can still get before voters this fall. The deadline to get a question on the ballot is Sept. 11.

Former City Council Member Pat Scott, one of the faces of the petition effort, said the council’s decision was disappointing but not surprising.

“It’s unfortunate Pandora’s box was opened,” she said. “But it was opened by them.”

The other side

While Ginder argued the legal, appropriate route to create an independent Park Board would be to lobby the state Legislature, the petitioners said there already is room in state law for more independence.

Their side will be litigated by Fred Morrison, a University of Minnesota law professor who is considered a preeminent mind in local government law. Morrison is expected to argue that because the Park Board’s independently elected board was created in 1883 — before the creation of Minneapolis’ city charter — it can petition for more power. Ginder’s opinion that the referendum would illegally create a new local governmental unit doesn’t apply because technically, the modified Park Board wouldn’t really be new, Morrison wrote in an Aug. 19 letter to the petitioners.

“Your amendment does no more than what the Legislature actually did in 1883 and 1889,” he wrote.

Some council members struggled with what to do. Several appeared to sway, wondering whether to consider Morrison’s side with as much weight as Ginder’s opinion.

Council Member Cam Gordon (2nd Ward) implied several times that it seemed as if the council really was voting on the petition’s content. The city isn’t showing faith in its residents, Gordon said.

Those words set off Council Member Scott Benson (11th Ward), who pointed to Gordon’s opposition earlier this year to put to a citizen vote a charter amendment proposed by Council Member Paul Ostrow (1st Ward) to eliminate the Park Board.

“Nobody had faith in the people to decide that issue,” Benson said.

Ostrow also chimed in, vehemently opposing the ballot initiative.

“This is not legal,” he said. “This is not constitutional. And I frankly think it would be the height of cynicism to put this on the ballot.”

Council members Sandy Colvin Roy (12th Ward) and Gordon dissented.


Already a struggle

Even before the council’s decision to deny the petition, the Park Board’s commissioners were fighting an uphill battle with fellow politicians in Minneapolis.

The Charter Commission, which with citizen petitions usually plays little more than a handing-off role, moved the ballot measure to the City Council with a begrudging attitude. It attached a note to the council recommending against putting the question on the ballot.

Just a week earlier, while drafting a resolution to set out the principles it would follow if voters were to make them independent, the Park Board made several statements that directly attacked the biggest questions its initiative has faced. An early draft said, “It has never been nor ever will be the intent of the Park and Recreation Board to seek unlimited taxing authority.”

That appeared directly targeted at Mayor R.T. Rybak, who several commissioners said was making false claims to campaign against their initiative. Rybak has said the Park Board would gain unlimited taxing authority if the initiative succeeds, while also calling the effort “half-baked” and saying it’s based on “false fears about non-existent threats.”

Board Vice President Mary Merrill Anderson said the unlimited taxing authority argument is part of an “aggressive campaign of misinformation.” The state would set limits for how much the Park Board could tax, she said.

Of course, it would first need a victory in court.


—
The ballot question

A petition to place a referendum for a fully independent Park Board was rejected Aug. 28 by the City Council, but the question could still end up on the Nov. 3 ballot if its supporters win in court. The charter amendment would read:

“The Minneapolis Park and Recreation board shall be separate and independent governmental unit of the state of Minnesota with an elected board of commissioners. The Park and Recreation Board shall preserve and protect park land, lakes and open spaces as a public trust forever and shall have all powers and rights of a separate and independent governmental unit of the state as determined by the state legislature. The Mayor of Minneapolis shall have the right to veto the Park and Recreation Board’s legislative actions and budget, subject to the ability of Park Board to override a veto by two-thirds (2/3rds) vote.”

City Council to voters: No!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Friday, August 28, 2009

Citizens Take Action to Protect Constitutional Rights

Supporters of an independent Park Board, including two former Minneapolis Mayors, have filed suit against the City of Minneapolis to ensure that a proposed amendment to the City Charter is placed on the ballot this November.

The action comes after the Minneapolis City Council voted not to place the proposed amendment on the ballot. A petition requesting the amendment, which would declare the Park Board to be a “separate and independent governmental unit”, was submitted to the City with over 17,000 signatures on August 10.

“We are deeply disturbed that a majority of the City Council feels empowered to thumb their noses at thousands of citizens exercising their Constitutional right to petition for Charter change,” said Scott Neiman, chair of the Citizens for Independent Parks Committee (CFIP), which led the petition drive. “We believe strongly that the Council does not have the authority to refuse this petition,” added Neiman, “City residents have asked for a chance to vote on this issue, and we intend to make sure that happens.”

An opinion recently issued by University of Minnesota Law School Professor Fred Morrison maintains that the petition meets all legal requirements, and that the state Constitution requires the City to place the petition question on the November ballot.

Along with Neiman, a former President of the Minneapolis Park Board, the five Electors who led the petition drive include former Mayor and Congressman Don Fraser, former Mayor Sharon Sayles Belton, former City Council Member Pat Scott, and former County Commissioner Mark Andrew. Over 250 volunteers participated in the petition drive, which began in early July.

For questions or additional press inquiries please contact Justin Fay at (612) 251-1457.

They’re at it again

A Park watch member posted a letter to the Minneapolis Issues List objecting to the treatment Park Watch receives on this blog.

As always from this group there are a number of distortions and misrepresentations which is why we started this blog in the first place. Last week the poster got hit pretty badly on the Issues List when she posted a comment blaming children’s parks for causing parking fees.

Another poster then commented that she would no longer be able to ride her bike at a park if they took away her free parking. It was then pointed out that the parks had always had fees for parking.

Now we are told that pointing out the stuff that they make up is “an attack on free speech”.

We are not attacking their right to say anything. We are attacking the distortions and factual errors that often come out of this group. Their right to free speech is matched by our right to point out when they are wrong.

I’m sorry if she thinks we cleaned up our act. We haven’t! The original post with our reason for starting this blog can still be found here. The characters of Park Watch are still here in the archives. The home page side bar will continually change.

Frankly the five old ladies that Fitzgerald claims are Park Watch might just be the meanest five old ladies in Minneapolis, and we will continue to point that out.

They have tried to destroy the careers and lives of really good people, and have used false and misleading statements to do so. We have pointed them out. They have never retracted a story even when proven wrong. Their site is about destroying people.

We have pointed out the hundreds of thousands of dollars that these folks have cost the taxpayers without a single benefit being provided.

Park Watch is completely negative in their approach to anything park related. We are not.

This is the only site where candidates were asked to answer questions and many did and continue to do so. We have said that we will publish any answers they offer and if they chose not to answer then we will go to their websites and publications and try to obtain the answers because we think you should have the answers before you vote.

We are not surprised that Park Watch would praise candidates who chose not to publicly state positions by answering our questions. We hope the voters won’t let them get away with it.

From Southwest Journal: Election could spell end for Park Board watchdogs

Below is the content of an article from the current issue of the Southwest Journal, August 24-September 6, 2009.

Election could spell end for Park Board watchdogs
By Cristof Traudes

Bob Fine is a longtime commissioner on the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board. Arlene Fried is a watchdog who often calls out Fine for his actions.

The two almost never see eye to eye, but this year is different. In rare agreement, they want the same thing in 2010: for Park Watch, Fried’s watchdog group, to come to an end.

Of course, they disagree on how to get to that point.

Fine, a 12-year veteran of the Park Board, considers Park Watch trouble. He’s had a long-standing belief that the group does little more than find fault, taking up too much of Park Board commissioners’ and staff’s time while sowing unfounded seeds of wrong-doing in commissioners’ minds.

He cites the hundreds of open-records requests filed by Park Watch members since the group’s formation in 2004. Park Watch members accounted for more than half of 275 data requests since late 2006. To fill those requests — which have ranged from asking for video footage of meetings to wanting all information, letters and e-mails applying to one or multiple topics — can take many hours of staff time, said John Goodrich, who oversees the Park Board’s responses.

Fine also points to frequent prodding on such issues as the recent Lake Calhoun south shore parking lot makeover, a project that parks staff has continuously referred to as maintenance but Park Watch members are convinced is a capital upgrade.

Fine dislikes Park Watch so much, he only refers to them as Park Fault. “To me, what’s most important is to see the Park Board not controlled by these groups. I don’t think have the best interest of the Park Board in mind,” he said.

When he announced in July that he was running for another term on the Park Board, he said one of his main motivations was to prevent the arrival of more commissioners who listen to Park Watch. Prevent that, he said, and maybe the group will have little to no influence next year.

He has an uphill battle: For the first time, two Park Watch affiliates, people who have personally filed numerous data requests and have attended Park Board meetings for years, are seeking seats on the board. One of them, District 4’s Anita Tabb, is practically a lock to win — nobody else filed to run in her race.

Fried couldn’t be happier. If Park Watch co-founder Liz Wielinski, the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party’s endorsed candidate for District 1, also were to win, Fried said there’s a good possibility her watchdog group won’t be necessary anymore. The reason for all of the group’s data practices requests is that the current Park Board commissioners aren’t getting all of the information they need and aren’t asking for it, either, Fried said. Wielinski and Tabb already know to ask questions, which she expects them to continue to do if they were on the board. “We would finally have a board that really supports the basics of good government,” Fried said.

Tabb anticipates still talking to Park Watch if she were seated, although she’s hesitant about being referred to as a Park Watch candidate. She isn’t endorsed by the group — unlike in 2005, it won’t endorse anybody this year — and she said she never officially was a member. But she said she does listen to and respect the group. Its members, Tabb said, genuinely care about the future of the parks. “I expect all of those relationships to continue,” she said.

Wielinski doesn’t expect her work on the board to be much different from what she does now. Her goal with Park Watch, she said, always was to steer the Park Board in a better direction. Yes, that could take on a negative tone, but the job isn’t to celebrate accomplishments.
“It’s a watchdog group,” Wielinski said. “It’s not P.R. for the Park Board.”

When asked what she thought having Tabb and Wielinski elected to the board would mean, Fried sounded near ecstatic.

“I’d have to laugh,” she said. “We’d have two of our people right there, on the board.” For Park Watch, it would be “mission accomplished,” she said.

—What is Park Watch?
Park Watch is a watchdog group that tracks the actions of the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board. Its members say they’ve improved civic discourse by drawing attention to votes that otherwise might have passed with little public comment; critics accuse them of spreading disinformation and intimidating parks staff.
The group formed in the wake of the Park Board’s hiring of Superintendent Jon Gurban, who had neither applied for the job nor gone through a screening process. Members take notes at meetings and then disseminate selected information and analysis through its blog, letters to the editor and on the online Minneapolis Issues List.
Arlene Fried, the most vocal of Park Watch’s co-founders, often speaks in strong terms when describing the Park Board, especially when it comes to high-level staff. Her words of choice include “egregious” and “outrageous.”

Candidate Questionnaire: Steve Barland

1. Why are you running to be a Commissioner on the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board?

While I am a newcomer to the political campaign scene, I am no stranger to our beloved Park System. The next few years promise to be some of the most difficult local governments have faced in memory. The residents of this district will need a dedicated, experienced representative who will champion and protect the places and programs that contribute to our celebrated quality of life. I possess a lifelong track record of playing, growing and leading in our parks and will be an unflagging advocate for them, and the residents that cherish them, as a member of the Park Board. Accidently

2. How would you describe the “job” of a park commissioner? What are the most important roles and responsibilities?

A Minneapolis Park Commissioner is one of nine elected members that comprise the policy board that oversees the professional staff as it carries out the complex mission of the Park and Recreation system. A commissioner must find balance between her/his responsibilities as a steward of our parks and open space and charge to maintain and enhance recreational opportunities for all Minneapolis residents. An effective commissioner is one that stays above the fray of the petty politics that have tarnished this fine organization’s image in some quarters. A commissioner elected from a district must take special care to work in consort with the citizens in that district to represent their interests as policy and funding.

3. Are you running on a “reform” platform, or not? Please explain, be specific.

The “R” word I prefer is represent. I am not a product of a self-appointed interest group nor am I just another cog in a rusty political machine. My entire adult life as been spent as a participant and contributor to our parks, in our parks. I can make good on my pledge to work with Park Councils, parent groups and other advocates from this district because I am one of them.

4. Do you support or oppose the proposed referendum for Park Board independence? Please explain.

I am a strong supporter of the initiative to make the Park and Recreation Board a completely independent entity. I believe that the rancor that some direct towards those who sought to fold the Park Board into the City is misplaced and typical of the sour politics that turns voters off. In fact they did Minneapolis a favor, this move for promised but unproven efficiency literally untied voters in favor of the independence which has served our City in extraordinary fashion since MPRB was established. To the chagrin of some of my active supporters instead of campaigning for myself, I spent many hours working with other volunteers in the parks seeking signatures so that the issue would make it to the ballot. Congratulations are due all those who made the effort a success.

5. What experience do you have that qualifies you to serve on a board of an organization that has a $60 million budget, 600 full time employees, 1300 part time employees and controls 6400 acres of park land?

As I outlined in question #2 a commissioner is one of nine and must first and foremost have an ability to work constructively with others. I have thirty years of experience balancing park related budgets, compromising when needed but never where principle is at stake. I am not well known at the ubiquitous cocktail fundraisers around the City but voters can check out my reputation with any of the hardworking members of park councils in the district. The other measure of qualification I believe is that by November I will have knocked on the doors of every voter in District Five. My position is that the next years will be among the most difficult MPRB has ever seen. The voters will be clear that as the inevitable cuts begin to mount that I will do everything I can to protect our neighborhood recreation centers and the programs they house. There is no better qualification for elected office than letting voters know exactly where you stand on critical issues.

6. What is your view on how the MPRB should approach public/private partnerships, “enterprise” or income-generating projects?

Since its inception the Park Board has relied in some fashion on enterprises outside of traditional tax revenue for financial support. Some, like our golf courses have been run internally with great success. Others, like Sea Salt at Minnehaha, are private parties providing a win win for themselves and the public. I think the policy board and staff are completely capable of weighing opportunities individually in a productive and transparent environment.

7. While employee morale remains high, there has been an acrimonious relationship between some of the members of the board and the staff and even between board members themselves. Why do you think this is, and what if anything would you do to improve these relationships?

Since I announced my candidacy I have been focused on the issues and on introducing myself to individual voters and groups of interested citizens. It is crystal clear that I will owe allegiance to no one but the taxpayers once elected. I have eschewed public endorsements from politicians because, in part, I am weary of the games they play in the pursuit of personal power. I cherish my professional relationships with the staff that deliver wonderfully across the neighborhoods I seek to represent. They are witness, I believe, to my integrity and focus on the mission. This election is important; the stakes in the wake of extraordinary times are extraordinarily high. The professional staff will be well served knowing that I will be a commissioner whose priorities are clear and well stated and that I will always put the grand legacy of the organization before personal political gain.

8. There is a general perception that the MPRB has sometimes had strained relationships with other organizations (City, County). What is your perception and how will you approach these relationships?

There is nothing that beats a fresh start!!!

Well Done!

Here's a copy of the press release:

City Verifies Signatures on Citizens’ Petition

The Minneapolis Elections Department has completed the work of verifying that a citizens’ petition submitted last week does contain the required number of signatures to place a proposed City Charter Amendment on the November 3 general election ballot.

The proposed amendment would establish the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board as a separate and independent unit of government. Leaders supporting the petition drive include former Mayors Don Fraser and Sharon Sayles Belton, former City Councilmember Pat Scott, former Minneapolis Park Board President Scott Neiman, and former County Commissioner Mark Andrew.

In order to place an amendment to the City Charter on the ballot, proponents were required to gather signatures from 10,449 registered Minneapolis voters. The petition was submitted on August 10, and the process of verifying signatures began the following day. The verification is considered unofficial until acted upon by the Charter Commission, which is now required to formally transmit the petition to the City Council.

“We appreciate the hard work of the City Clerk’s office and the City Elections Department staff to complete this task in a timely manner,” said Neiman, who is acting as chair for the Citizens’ campaign, “The voters have requested a chance to decide this issue, and we hope that the Charter Commission will act quickly to keep this process moving forward.”

At the request of the City Council, the Charter Commission is expected to hold a special meeting before August 27 to formally transmit the petition to the City Council. The next regularly scheduled City Council meeting is August 28.

For questions or additional press inquiries please contact Justin Fay at (612) 251-1457.

A Beautiful Stained Glass Window

We here at Park Watch Watch recently received an e-mail from a follower that contained this suggestion,

"How about you report on positive things the park board and park commissioners are doing?

I see you have a 'misbehavior report' and I figure that is a sarcastic poke at Park Watch's disrespectful use of the word 'misbehavior' to describe the actions of adult commissioners. It is kind of funny, but don't be tempted to stoop to their level. Instead, report some good news. The way I see it, we are all working hard and we are under stress, what with war, healthcare, economy, schools, jobs, crime, you name it. When an organization like Park Watch does nothing but put out bad news, criticism, insults, and negativity, it lowers the tide and lowers all boats, so to speak. It's the worst of human nature when all these real problems exist, that these sad people would pick on something as good as our park system.

So send us some glad tidings!"

In that spirit, above is a photo of something new and beautiful in the parks. Does anyone know where it is? Does anyone know who initiated it? More to follow.....

Candidate Questionnaire: Bob Fine

1. Why are you running to be a Commissioner on the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board?
I decided to file for a city wide seat instead of my safe District seat, where I have lived my entire life and coached more than 1,000 kids over the past 35 years because of the most important issue facing the greatest urban park system in America, its independence! This system has been threatened from both within and without. First are those who are attempting to end the independence of this system. Then there are the forces, not so apparent, that have made it their object to find fault with a Park organization which has done a great job maintaining a system despite the limitations on its resources.

2. How would you describe the “job” of a park commissioner? What are the most important roles and responsibilities?
Our primary responsibility is to establish a vision as well as budget priorities for the system, and to ensure we have the resources to carry it out. My background and experience will be important to help us meet these challenges.

3. Are you running on a “reform” platform, or not? Please explain, be specific.
No. Reform is a term being used by the groups that spend their time unfairly criticizing the system.

4. Do you support or oppose the proposed referendum for Park Board independence? Please explain.
Support 100%! This system is the way it is because of its independence, and to end its financial independence will have a negative effect over the long term.

5. What experience do you have that qualifies you to serve on a board of an organization that has a $60 million budget, 600 full time employees, 1300 part time employees and controls 6400 acres of park land?
I have lived my entire life in Minneapolis, worked in the system while in college and coached over a 1,000 kids over the past 35 years. I have served the community for over three decades, including 12 years on the Board (the first four city-wide), serving as its President, spent 18 years on the Minneapolis Civil Rights Commissioner, the Zoning Board and numerous other Boards and committees. I am a real estate attorney and worked over a decade in business and management.

6. What is your view on how the MPRB should approach public/private partnerships, “enterprise” or income-generating projects?
Income-generating projects are critical to our long-term sustainability. However, the most important thing to keep in mind is our mission, and that is to preserve for our parks and provide recreational opportunities for current and future generations.

7. While employee morale remains high, there has been an acrimonious relationship between some of the members of the board and the staff and even between board members themselves. Why do you think this is, and what if anything would you do to improve these relationships?
This perception dates back to a previous board. One of the former members, part of that acrimonious group, is again seeking election to the Board. I have good relationships with staff and colleagues. This is an effort by the fault groups to falsely portray the system and the Board.

8. There is a general perception that the MPRB has sometimes had strained relationships with other organizations (City, County). What is your perception and how will you approach these relationships?
The only perception of strained relationships is with the City (not the schools), which has officials who have either criticized the Park system or sought to end its independence. Relationships with the other agencies have been good. We have taken some bold initiatives, with the new Comprehensive Plan for the long term vision, new parks and facilities, changes along the upper riverfront, completing the Grand Rounds, and unique public/private partnerships. We need to establish our independence and continue to work with the city on the partnerships with them, as we have with the other government officials, for the good of the city.

Candidate Questionnaire: Mary Merrill Anderson

1. Why are you running to be a Commissioner on the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board?
Parks & Recreation are my passion, my life’s work. I believe in the many benefits that Parks and Recreation provide the city that I love and live in and I believe that I have the necessary background (over 32 years as a Professional in the field of Parks and Recreation - from Park Director to Superintendent) and experience as a Park Commissioner At Large to make a significant contribution to the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board. I want serve as an at-large, or city-wide commissioner, so I represent every resident and park user. I am also a strong advocate for children, People with Disabilities, communities of color, the environment and safe parks. I’m running for my second term to continue this essential advocacy.

2. How would you describe the “job” of a park commissioner? What are the most important roles and responsibilities?
The role of the Board is to represent the residents of Minneapolis as they set the overall vision, mission and goals and develop the policies that implement that mission, vision and goals for the entire park and recreation system. The board hires a Superintendent to implement the mission, vision and goals of the Board and to manage the Park and Recreation System. The commissioners provide strong advocacy for the Park & Recreation system, working with citizens, community groups, businesses, foundations and other units of government in the provision of Park & Recreation Services and shared areas of responsibility. The Park Commissioner is accountable to the voters of Minneapolis for its stewardship of the Park & Recreation System.

3. Are you running on a “reform” platform, or not? Please explain, be specific.
I sincerely believe in robust citizen participation, and I know from experience that every organization can, in fact, must strive for constant progress and improvement. The Minneapolis park system is one of best in the world, our board is strong, and our organization is outstanding. In order to maintain a strong Park & Recreation System we must always be looking to respond to new and changing needs, which means the system must adapt and change to continue meeting the needs of Minneapolis Residents. The Board's Comprehensive Plan is a dynamic strategy based on citizen participation and direction, leading to better meeting the needs of residents.

4. Do you support or oppose the proposed referendum for Park Board independence? Please explain.
I strongly support it. A strong independent and elected Park Board ensures that a strong park system is and has been at the root of Minneapolis as a strong and healthy city. Maintaining and reaffirming the independence of the 126 year old Park Board created by the State Legislature and the Voters of Minneapolis will allow us to better protect, preserve and enhance the Park and Recreation system. Maintaining the Minneapolis Park & Recreation Board as a national model for land stewardship, environmental leadership and vital recreational programs will make Minneapolis more successful, and one of the best cities in the country to live in.

5. What experience do you have that qualifies you to serve on a board of an organization that has a $60 million budget, 600 full time employees, 1300 part time employees and controls 6400 acres of park land?
Since 1972, when I graduated from the University of Minnesota, I have spent every day of my life working in and for the Minneapolis Parks. I have been a Recreation Center Director, Training Coordinator, Citywide Manager of Recreation programs, Assistant Superintendent for Recreation & Administration, Park Board Secretary and Superintendent of the MPRB. I have also pursued continuing education and executive development, including NRPA Certified Park and Recreation Professional. I have served as the President of Minnesota Recreation & Park Association and the NRPEMS and other National Park & Recreation organizations. Locally I have also served the community through numerous community organizations and boards including: Hope Community, Pacer Center, Minneapolis Youth Trust, NAACP, Urban League, City’s Children 2007, and Parent Advisory Council on Latch Key Minneapolis.

6. What is your view on how the MPRB should approach public/private partnerships, “enterprise” or income-generating projects?
I believe in today’s economic environment we must be open to looking at new ways to generate revenue to help support the important mission of the Park & Recreation system. When looking at what should be our approach we should consider the following:
-What is the public purpose and need or desire?
-Can the service or program be provided by Park & Recreation staff in a manner that is cost effective and generate income?
-Is the service or program within the mission of the Park & Recreation Board?
-What are the public benefits to be derived?
I believe it is important to listen to citizens and residents of Minneapolis in a proactive way, sharing with them as we explore how we can ensure the future sustainability of the Park and Recreation System. We also need to proceed cautiously and continue to learn from our experiences. My main criteria for a successful project would be that it advances our mission to preserve our natural resources or add to our recreational opportunities. We need to both evaluate projects that are proposed to us, and proactively seek out projects, on our own terms, that are consistent with our Comprehensive Plan.

7. While employee morale remains high, there has been an acrimonious relationship between some of the members of the board and the staff and even between board members themselves. Why do you think this is, and what if anything would you do to improve these relationships?
I believe there has been significant improvement in relationships on the Board. I believe that Board members treat each other and staff in a respectful and civil manner. There are differences of opinion, which is healthy, but by and large, we have cordial and productive relationships. I believe that the current Board members love the Park & Recreation system and put their responsibility as Board members first.

8. There is a general perception that the MPRB has sometimes had strained relationships with other organizations (City, County). What is your perception and how will you approach these relationships?
My perception is that we have had very effective working relationships with other organizations. We have worked well with our State Legislature, and collaborated with the Metropolitan Council, the University of Minnesota, the city, the county and other organizations on some complicated projects, and were able to proceed successfully despite very divergent opinions and objectives. Even with the current situation regarding the Charter Amendment to reaffirm the independent and elected status of the Park Board, we are still working with the City on many issues of mutual concern, such as the Mississippi River. I believe that we can always work harder on having more joint meeting with other jurisdictions either annually or more often as needed as well as on joint commissions and boards.

Visit Mary's website at: http://mary4parks.org/

Candidate Questionnaire: Carol Kummer

1. Why are you running to be a Commissioner on the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board?
I am running because my experience working effectively with other units of government, and my ability to build coalitions and create consensus is critically needed on our board at this time. We are facing enormous economic and environmental challenges. The referendum for park board independence will likely be approved by the voters and we will need to work with the State Legislature to hammer out the legal and practical details of a financially independent Park Board. My 22 years working at the MN State Legislature, 12 years serving as a member of the Metropolitan Council, 8 years as a Metropolitan Waste Control Commissioner, and 6 years on the MPRB have given me more experience, skills and relationships than any other commissioner or candidate to get things done in government.

2. How would you describe the “job” of a park commissioner? What are the most important roles and responsibilities?
The job of every district commissioner is to advocate for our constituents and parks, work together to create a long-term vision for the park system, and to support our staff. Beyond that, each Commissioner brings his or her own professional expertise, such as business, finance, recreation programming, legal, real estate, or organizational development. I apply my own experience and people skills to ensure our parks have adequate resources to best serve my constituents.

3. Are you running on a “reform” platform, or not? Please explain, be specific.
I ran on “meaningful reform” four years ago and I still believe in that concept.
The recent park “reform” movement has had two themes: transparency and accountability. I fully support both principles, as they are important to a successful democracy. The MPRB is open and accountable in all of its proceedings. To falsely disparage our park board with these accusations, and to create doubt and distrust in the minds of citizens is damaging to our park system, demoralizing to our staff, and fuels a kind of activism that simply causes more harm than good. I am running on a strong platform of openness, accountability and citizen participation, in order to continue our commitment to those principles.

4. Do you support or oppose the proposed referendum for Park Board independence? Please explain.
I actively support it as part of a broad strategy to sustain our parks, open spaces, trails and rec programming today and for future generations.

5. What experience do you have that qualifies you to serve on a board of an organization that has a $60 million budget, 600 full time employees, 1300 part time employees and controls 6400 acres of park land?
For more than 10 years at the Minnesota House of Representatives, I administered the Labor & Industry, Governmental Operations, Health & Human Services, Regulated Industries and the Appropriations committees, helping to create laws that affected every Minnesotan, with budgets in the tens of millions of dollars. For 8 years as a Metropolitan Waste Control Commissioner, I worked to develop programs to beneficially re-use byproducts from the wastewater treatment process. While serving 12 years on the Metropolitan Council, I served on the Transportation Committee, I chaired the Hiawatha LRT citizens advisory committee, and chaired the Environment Committee. I was the Metro Parks and Open Space liaison, co-chair of the Polluted Sites Working Group, and founder and member of the Core Cities Working Group. I currently chair the MPRB Legislative Committee, and serve as liaison to the legislature to help ensure we are working cooperatively with our regional park system.

6. What is your view on how the MPRB should approach public/private partnerships, “enterprise” or income-generating projects?
First of all, these types of projects are essential to our financial sustainability. Theodore Wirth was the first to declare that park services could not be maintained solely with tax revenue, and sadly this is even truer today. Our “Watchers” and my Park Watch opponent have been harshly critical of some of these projects, including Sea Salt at Minnehaha Falls, which is run by two local guys. I was roundly criticized for supporting it, but I am proud of that support, and it has been very successful. We need to keep in mind that our primary mission is to preserve and protect our parks, and to provide recreational opportunities. So while each project must be approached individually, they must meet the basic criteria of advancing the parks’ mission, being appropriate to the area, and generate a benefit to the system. For these endeavors to be successful, we have to support and encourage our staff to think outside the box, and to engage and encourage citizens to do the same.

7. While employee morale remains high, there has been an acrimonious relationship between some of the members of the board and the staff and even between board members themselves. Why do you think this is, and what if anything would you do to improve these relationships?
Disagreement and debate are natural as well as productive. Currently, there is a great deal of respect among Commissioners and staff, and the concept of a “divided” or “5:4” board is largely untrue, and something of an invention of Park Watch and the actions of a previous board. We frequently have unanimous votes, and when we don’t, they don’t split along “faction” lines. I personally believe we all are entitled to our opinions and working together can bring about compromise. I encourage anyone who is reading these questionnaires to attend park board meetings, watch them on television, and to volunteer in the parks. Follow this link to learn more about volunteer opportunities http://www.minneapolisparks.org/default.asp?PageID=78 or here for other ways to support the parks http://www.minneapolisparks.org/default.asp?PageID=179.

I would like to thank Park Watch Watch for including questions about respectful communication among commissioners, staff and other organizations. It has been a challenge for us, and volunteers and citizens, to turn the other cheek on Park Watch’s unrelenting criticism and suspicion. When I was appointed to the board, a Park Watch-endorsed candidate said she would “hold her nose” and vote for me. In the last election, they referred to me as an “empty-headed cheerleader.” I won anyway.

8. There is a general perception that the MPRB has sometimes has strained relationships with other organizations (City, County). What is your perception and how will you approach these relationships?
I think this perception has been around for some time. I have done my best to work across jurisdictions for mutual benefit. More recently, this perception most likely comes from efforts made by Councilmember Ostrow and Charter Commission to eliminate the independently-elected park board. In fact, the MPRB has cordial and productive relationships with other organizations, and of course, individuals within those organizations. And they will continue until and after the November election and referendum. Having positive and respectful relationships with others is a particularly high priority for me.

Candidate Questionnaire: Meg Forney

1. Why are you running to be a Commissioner on the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board?
I am running for Minneapolis Park and Recreation’s District 6 Commissioner to advocate for the quality of life in Minneapolis that our Park System has established and maintained. My passion and effective leadership of more than 30 years of civic service has been to continue the tradition of green and open space for urban livability.

Thank you for the opportunity to address your concerns and interests on behalf of the voters in making their critical decision this fall for the future of our Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board.
For more information about my candidacy, please visit my website at http://www.megforney.org/ or my Facebook Fan page http://www.facebook.com/pages/Meg-Forney-for-Parks/240944295696?ref=s

2. How would you describe the “job” of a park commissioner? What are the most important roles and responsibilities?
Park Commissioners are policy setters, not micro-managers. Their number one job is to hire a Superintendent. The next Park Board when seated may very well be entrusted with this task. I have worked with three Superintendents, each has their own style and I have watched how they have addressed the issues and opportunities before them. My working experience will be invaluable in selecting the next Superintendent. We have a rich tradition of having visionaries at the helm.

3. Are you running on a “reform” platform, or not? Please explain, be specific.
To reform the present connection to the City by making the MPRB independent, YES! Indefatigably yes, I support the Charter Amendment change to establish our Park Board as fully independent.

4. Do you support or oppose the proposed referendum for Park Board independence? Please explain.
I have been proudly door knocking with the petition for a Charter Amendment to be placed on the ballot this fall to establish a completely Independent Park Board. It’s time for the Park Board to achieve full independence and build bridges with both public and private partners to address critical issues in these challenging times. I have been pro-active in this effort. During my door knocking, I have engaged voters in the 6th District regarding this issue. The support has been amazing.

5. What experience do you have that qualifies you to serve on a board of an organization that has a $60 million budget, 600 full time employees, 1300 part time employees and controls 6400 acres of park land?
With my proven leadership, strategic vision and ability to build bridges, ... It’s time!
For 30+ years, I have effectively promoted our park system through both:
• City Wide efforts like People for Parks and the Committee on Urban Environment
• and project specific committees like the Lake Harriet Bandstand Fundraising and the Above the Falls Citizen Advisory Committee.

I am the only District 6 candidate who has been appointed to our Parks' Citizen Advisory Committees - in fact, to more than half-a-dozen, chairing 2 of these.

My strategic vision was instrumental in advocating for and implementing our Parks' new Comprehensive Plan, updating the one dated back to the ‘60’s. It's time to activate the promise of that plan - through measurable objectives.


6. What is your view on how the MPRB should approach public/private partnerships, “enterprise” or income-generating projects?
Earned revenue has been in the Park System for years through our golf courses and concessions and is needed. The focus on making these ventures more “professional” is appropriate. But balance is needed. We need clarity of policy: when, where, how, need to be weighed and measured with strong community engagement and understanding of context.

7. While employee morale remains high, there has been an acrimonious relationship between some of the members of the board and the staff and even between board members themselves. Why do you think this is, and what if anything would you do to improve these relationships?
Clarity from an updated Comprehensive Plan has helped immensely for all relationships - between staff and Commissioners, with citizens and the greater system and with all levels of government. Pursuing the plan with measurable objectives and performance plans will translate into more accountability and aid in defining expectations.

8. There is a general perception that the MPRB has sometimes has strained relationships with other organizations (City, County). What is your perception and how will you approach these relationships?
See above. Plus my experience as a Realtor is based on extensive relationship building. My skill sets are best in creating win-win situations for all parties with shared objectives.

Candidate Questionnaire: Bernie Kunza

1. Why are you running to be a Commissioner on the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board?

I am running for Commissioner of District One to be a representative of the residents of the Eastside. I want to work as part of the team that will improve and maintain the valuable resources of our city, paying special attention to the Riverfront, the health of our boulevard trees, and the trees that shade our parks. I also want to focus on the quality and variety of the recreational opportunities that are offered in my community paying special attention to securing some destination parks and amenities on the Eastside.

2. How would you describe the “job” of a park commissioner? What are the most important roles and responsibilities?

The job of park commissioner has many important roles and responsibilities. Commissioners represent their communities on a city-wide board that oversees the entire park system. Each member has an important role in their community as a leader and a representative that will listen to and represent the people that live in their districts. The job of park commissioner also entails giving special attention to the environmental issues that affect the park system, like restoring the water quality in our lakes and cleaning-up the Riverfront.

3. Are you running on a “reform” platform, or not? Please explain, be specific.
I do not believe that I would call myself a “reform” candidate. I am for any reformation that improves that quality of life and safety for the residents of the Eastside and the City of Minneapolis as a whole. I however, do not believe that the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board should be dissolved as the independent park board is better able to serve the public needs in the areas of parks and recreation. If we lose the independence of the park board, it will put the lakes, parks, Riverfront, Boulevard trees, and Community programming at risk!

4. Do you support or oppose the proposed referendum for Park Board independence? Please explain.
I fully support the referendum for Park Board independence. I believe that the Park Board should remain a separate and independently elected board as I believe that the valuable resources such as Park land, the Riverfront, lakes, and boulevard trees are best cared for and overseen by an independently elected board that can direct it’s full attention to maintaining and improving these assets. It is my belief that if the city were to administer these projects and programs, the quality and quantity of these programs will suffer as the City Council has many other issues to deal with and adding the supervision and administration of something Vital and Valuable to the residents of Minneapolis to an already overwhelmed City Council makes little to no sense.

5. What experience do you have that qualifies you to serve on a board of an organization that has a $60 million budget, 600 full time employees, 1300 part time employees and controls 6400 acres of park land?
I am a community member and volunteer, I have worked hard to unite my community and work with the Full and Part time staff to coordinate programs and special events on the Eastside. I have served as the president of the Northeast Boosters at Bottineau Park for the last two decades. I have coached various sports on the Eastside serving over 2, 000 children and coordinated the same amount of volunteers to assist in the programming, special events and Sports camps. Although examining the budget is not my expertise, I will study, review, and seek input to fully grasp the budget.

6. What is your view on how the MPRB should approach public/private partnerships, “enterprise” or income-generating projects?
I believe that all of the members that we can recruit to our team effort of maintaining and improving the resources that are overseen by the MPRB the better. Public and private partnerships lend to both entities the ability to better serve and build our communities. These projects should be carefully crafted to keep the public interest at the core. Income-generating projects enable the MPRB to move towards economic sustainability thus being better able to provide a wide and interesting range of programming as well as making the system better able to care for and improve its vast and important ant natural resources.

7. While employee morale remains high, there has been an acrimonious relationship between some of the members of the board and the staff and even between board members themselves. Why do you think this is, and what if anything would you do to improve these relationships?
I believe that there will be a certain amount of disagreement among the members of almost any group of elected officials. Disagreement sometimes bears out the discussions that ultimately change and improve the policies that the board adopts. So, in my opinion, not all disagreement is bad. If elected, I will work to build and maintain a TEAM atmosphere, empathizing that the acronym T.E.A.M. stands for Together Everyone Accomplishes More! Working together to serve the citizens of the City of Minneapolis by preserving and improving the vital natural resources and programming that the MPRB oversees is what the board members are elected to do; I will NOT forget that fact!

8. There is a general perception that the MPRB has sometimes had strained relationships with other organizations (City, County). What is your perception and how will you approach these relationships?
I will approach these relationships with the same mindset as described above, I will work with any entity as a team member that wants to contribute to a positive outcome for the residents of the city and the services and amenities offered thereof. I want to help build strong positive relationships with all organizations that the MPRB deals with as better relations will logically lead to better service and quality of life for all Minneapolis residents.

e-mail: bernie4recreation@gmail.com
website: www.bernie4recreation.org

Candidate Questionnaire: Steve Jecha

1. Why are you running to be a Commissioner on the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board?
When I saw that Bob Fine would not be running for reelection in District 6, I became very concerned about the potential direction that the Park & Recreation Board could go. Bob has always been a huge supporter of recreational programming through our local park community centers and I wanted to make sure that District 6 has a representative who both understands our Park system needs, as well as has been heavily involved in our city's recreational programming and fully understands their value to our community - both short and long term. For ten years I have coached hockey and soccer in Southwest Minneapolis and through this I have gained an appreciation for Park staff, Park Police, and those that operate our parks and programs out of 'West River Road'. I want to help them continue their great programming and grow it into the future.

With that said, I am an avid fan of our Park System and want to see it maintained and continually developed through an independent Park & Recreation Board. The Park & Recreation Board will be heading into very difficult financial times over the next several years due to budget cuts and lower tax revenues. I have both the business experience and entrepreneurial spirit that will be necessary to help guide our parks program forward. Readers can get more information regarding my positions on issues at http://ibelieveinminneapolis.com/ and also read my blog at http://stevejechaforparks.blogspot.com/.

2. How would you describe the “job” of a park commissioner? What are the most important roles and responsibilities?
Park Commissioners are the stewards of our Park System and our neighborhood recreational centers. Their 'job' is to continuously improve our current system while making sure that the Park System is strong today and even stronger for future generations. This includes keeping lakes clean, preventing invasive species in our waters and urban forests (e.g. zebra mussles and emerald ash borers), to providing recreational opportunities (sports, arts, etc.) at our local community centers that will allow both kids and adults to enjoy our parks.

The roles and responsibilities will vary. Short term, managing the Park Board's finances and keeping all of our recreational centers open is of highest importance. This may shift as priorities of the city shift.

3. Are you running on a “reform” platform, or not? Please explain, be specific.
No. We have the best urban park system in the country! More focus needs to be spent on how we continuously improve this park system to provide better and better experiences for our citizens and park staff; rather than "reform". While we all can agree that the park system moves slowly, it is moving in the right direction and that is what matters. 96% of our community rate the overall appearance and maintenance of our parks favorably. That same number rate the quality of our parks favorably. When the management and staff are putting up these kind of numbers, reform isn't necessary. However, requiring continuous improvement and forward thinking is required.

4. Do you support or oppose the proposed referendum for Park Board independence? Please explain.
Absolutely support independence. As stated above, the Park & Recreation system is working for this community the way it is set up. Quality of services to the community can only go down from where it is now...and it most likely would. Let's not break something that not only isn't broke, but is doing a positive job for our citizens.

5. What experience do you have that qualifies you to serve on a board of an organization that has a $60 million budget, 600 full time employees, 1300 part time employees and controls 6400 acres of park land?
I have run many companies, from a printing company, to a software company, to a 120 employee $13 million revenue company. In addition, I have been the President of the Southwest Minneapolis hockey association - a non-profit - that has 14 employees and $3,000,000 in revenues. I have guided the SWHA from near bankruptcy and low participant numbers to a surplus and huge recruiting successes. In light of the difficult financial times and difficult decisions that must be made by the Park & Recreation Board, these skills position me as one of the best candidates to help guide the Park Board's short and long term futures. I am an entrepreneur, and if ever there was a time where entreprenuers are needed on the Park Board, this is it.

6. What is your view on how the MPRB should approach public/private partnerships, “enterprise” or income-generating projects?
If, 1) it saves staff jobs and keeps recreational centers open by providing revenue to the Park Board, and 2) can be done in a way that has minimal negative impact to the park and surrounding neighbors; I am 100% for this approach. Sea Salt and The Tin Fish have been successful - both in providing a better park experience for users and in generating desperately needed income. The Park Board should also look at sponsorships, grants, etc. that are designed by the Park Board and done in a consistent and discreet manner so as to not turn our parks into one big advertisement - but also mindful that revenue saves staff jobs and keeps our community centers open - as well as having a full staff of Park Police to prevent crimes at our parks.

7. While employee morale remains high, there has been an acrimonious relationship between some of the members of the board and the staff and even between board members themselves. Why do you think this is, and what if anything would you do to improve these relationships?
I am not familiar with the situations. However, these same things - "acrimonious relationships" - can be said about almost any government body, corporation, non-profit. People have different opinions on what is right and what is wrong when it comes to making decisions. In the end, common sense usually wins out and that is what appears to be taking place with the Park Board.

8. There is a general perception that the MPRB has sometimes had strained relationships with other organizations (City, County). What is your perception and how will you approach these relationships?
Again, I am not familiar with this general perception. I will promote positive relationships between the City, County, school boards, Met council, and anyone else.

Candidate Questionnaire: Jon Olson

1. Why are you running to be a Commissioner on the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board?
I am running for my third term because I want to continue my strong advocacy for parks on the NorthSide. I was born on the NorthSide, I grew up and spent my entire life here, we raised our son here, and I’ve owned the north Lyndale Dairy Queen for 14 years. I understand the challenges we are facing, and I also know how terrific our people, our parks and our neighborhoods are. Right now we are working hard on improvements for Victory Memorial Parkway, planning for the re-design of the Webber Park swimming area, continuing implementation of the Above the Falls Master Plan, improvements to Wirth Beach with winter recreational opportunities, and several other local neighborhood initiatives. The first Tot Lot in the North Loop downtown is coming in 2010, and we are working to complete baseball improvements at Shingle Creek in with the support of the Camden Lions, of which I am a charter member.

2. How would you describe the “job” of a park commissioner? What are the most important roles and responsibilities?
I represent my constituents by advocating for our parks and working closely with residents and neighborhood groups to understand their needs and plan for the future. I work hard with my colleagues on a long term vision for the park system, and I support our talented and committed staff in carrying it out.

3. Are you running on a “reform” platform, or not? Please explain, be specific.
I think we have the best park system in the country, and certainly Minneapolis residents agree with me. I think this “reform” movement was politically motivated, and was advanced by people who are willing to attack good commissioners and run down our very capable staff at a time when they should be praised for the great work they do, despite budget cuts, and huge unforeseen challenges, such as Emerald Ash Borer.

4. Do you support or oppose the proposed referendum for Park Board independence? Please explain.
I strongly support it. We need to preserve and maintain our parks, and this is the best way to do it.

5. What experience do you have that qualifies you to serve on a board of an organization that has a $60 million budget, 600 full time employees, 1300 part time employees and controls 6400 acres of park land?
I have served on the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board for nearly 8 years, 4 as president of the board. I currently serve as vice chair of the legislative committee, and work with the state legislature to secure the resources we need to sustain our parks, and am very involved in budgeting. I am the former chair of the NRP policy board. As a lifetime resident, parent, homeowner, and small business owner, I care deeply about the preserving our parks, protecting our environment and having excellent rec programs, while keeping our property taxes as affordable as possible.

6. What is your view on how the MPRB should approach public/private partnerships, “enterprise” or income-generating projects?
I think vision and creativity, projects that meet current and projected needs, and projects that are suited to neighborhood are three most critical elements of success in these undertakings. We have some terrific successes, and we have also made some mistakes that we had to fix as well as learn from. I do know that about 90% of residents support public/private partnerships as a way to enhance revenue, and I am committed to pursuing these when they are feasible and add to the parks.

7. While employee morale remains high, there has been an acrimonious relationship between some of the members of the board and the staff and even between board members themselves. Why do you think this is, and what if anything would you do to improve these relationships?
I have worked hard to have respectful and productive working relationships with my colleagues, as well as staff. I follow the Golden Rule. But I also believe in holding people accountable for honesty and civility in their communication. We have an important job to do, and we can only get it done by showing respect for one another.

8. There is a general perception that the MPRB has sometimes had strained relationships with other organizations (City, County). What is your perception and how will you approach these relationships?
The MPRB, and I personally have strong working relationships at the state legislature, the county, and the city as well. I think some of this perception comes from some city council members seeking to revise the City Charter to eliminate the park board. It is natural in tough economic times to fight over scarce resources, and to seek to consolidate power. It is a misguided impulse, and I hope our proposed Charter Amendment for an Independent Board will solve that problem.

Candidate Questionnaire: Mike Wendorf

We have received our first completed 2009 PWW Candidate Questionnaire, and it is posted below in its entirety. It comes from Mike Wendorf who is challenging Scott Vreeland to represent Park District 3. It seems Mike got married on Friday night, and his new bride Erin shares his interest in the parks, as she is his campaign manager. Here are some excerpts from a press release they sent along with his questionnaire.

"MINNEAPOLIS—Candidate for Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board Commissioner District 3 Michael Wendorf is getting married on August 8th. He and his fiancé intend to spend their honeymoon campaigning for Parks. “Our Park System is what makes Minneapolis a great city. There is nothing more important I can do for my community, and my future, than work for strong, independent and sustainable parks...
....Mike and Erin are asking their wedding guests for contributions to his Park Board campaign. “We have a toaster,” he explained, “we don’t have the leadership we need to sustain our parks.”
More information is available at http://wendorfforparks.com/."

2009 PWW Candidate Questionnaire

1. Why are you running to be a Commissioner on the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board?
Our park system is the most unique and valuable asset we have in Minneapolis. I live on the Mississippi Riverfront downtown. I feel extraordinarily fortunate to have access to what I see as the very best park, trail, open space and recreation system in the country, and I saw an opportunity to give back, and to be of service to the community.

2. How would you describe the “job” of a park commissioner? What are the most important roles and responsibilities?
The most important roles of a district park commissioner are to advocate for the communities in the district s/he represents and to provide financial and environmental stewardship for the system as a whole.

3. Are you running on a “reform” platform, or not? Please explain, be specific.
I’m running out of my concern for the long-term success and sustainability of the parks. I’ve followed this debate closely and it is my impression that the term “reform” is being misused for political exploitation. I am not an advocate for the status quo. I am an advocate for continual progress through thoughtful and respectful dialogue.

4. Do you support or oppose the proposed referendum for Park Board independence? Please explain.
I strongly support it. The biggest threat facing our park system today is that our park land may be sold off for a short-term economic fix. An independent park board will provide the foundation for a sustainable system. This is an example of real reform.

5. What experience do you have that qualifies you to serve on a board of an organization that has a $60 million budget, 600 full time employees, 1300 part time employees and controls 6400 acres of park land?
My professional experience with commercial real estate and redevelopment of historic properties requires detailed planning, financial investment in the millions of dollars, and consensus building in the community. I will bring all of this experience to the park board.

6. What is your view on how the MPRB should approach public/private partnerships, “enterprise” or income-generating projects?
Citizen participation is critical to success in these endeavors. Visionary superintendent Theodore Wirth declared that a high level of services could not be maintained solely with tax dollars and his statement is even more relevant today. If we want successful innovation, citizens must be full partners in the planning process. I will consider it my job to ensure that the citizens of my district are fully represented in these decisions.

7. While employee morale remains high, there has been an acrimonious relationship between some of the members of the board and the staff and even between board members themselves. Why do you think this is, and what if anything would you do to improve these relationships?
This gets at the heart of why I am running. Many of my neighbors have expressed frustration with the antagonistic attitude and actions of our current representative, on items as far ranging as the Plank Road to the proposed East Phillips Community Center. I have suffered this myself and have observed it in his interactions with other park commissioners. In my experience, I have learned that publicly berating staff leads to poor morale and decreased productivity. I will commit to professional and respectful communication in all situations.

8. There is a general perception that the MPRB has sometimes had strained relationships with other organizations (City, County). What is your perception and how will you approach these relationships?
There is definitely some truth to this, and it is exacerbated by the environmental, economic, and other crises we are facing, such as LGA cuts. Combine this with the nature of electoral politics and you have the factors described in this question. The time for game playing is over. One of the most basic duties of every public servant is to respect the goals and responsibilities of every other unit of government, while serving the constituents that elected them. Public officials are here to serve you, not the other way around. Some of our elected officials are confused about this. It’s why so many people asked me to run.

2009 PWW Candidate Questionnaire

While our primary purpose here at Park Watch Watch is to pick, poke, prod and provoke that pestering plague Park Watch, our motivation is of course our unapologetic love for our parks. To that end, we are asking candidates for the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board to complete the following the 2009 PWW Candidate Questionnaire, the responses to which we will share with for our hundreds of readers to help them in their voting decisions this fall.

This questionnaire is being sent to the candidates listed below. We ask that completed questionnaires be returned as soon as possible, before August 14th. We will post answers as we receive them. If candidates choose not to respond, we will attempt to present that candidate based on his or her record, campaign materials, and public statements.

1. Why are you running to be a Commissioner on the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board?

2. How would you describe the “job” of a park commissioner? What are the most important roles and responsibilities?

3. Are you running on a “reform” platform, or not? Please explain, be specific.

4. Do you support or oppose the proposed referendum for Park Board independence? Please explain.

5. What experience do you have that qualifies you to serve on a board of an organization that has a $60 million budget, 600 full time employees, 1300 part time employees and controls 6400 acres of park land?

6. What is your view on how the MPRB should approach public/private partnerships, “enterprise” or income-generating projects?

7. While employee morale remains high, there has been an acrimonious relationship between some of the members of the board and the staff and even between board members themselves. Why do you think this is, and what if anything would you do to improve these relationships?

8. There is a general perception that the MPRB has sometimes has strained relationships with other organizations (City, County). What is your perception and how will you approach these relationships?


Mary Merrill Anderson, Bryn Mawr, mary4parks@yahoo.com
Nancy Bernard, St. Anthony West, nbernard52@yahoo.com
John Butler, Windom Park
John Erwin, Seward, erwinforparks09@yahoo.com
Bob Fine, Linden Hills, fineparks@yahoo.com
Tom Nordyke, Cedar-Isles-Dean, nordyketom@aol.com
David Wahlstedt, Bryn Mawr
Annie Young, East Phillips, anniey@visi.com
Bernie Kunza, Columbia Park, bkunza12@hotmail.com
John Malone,St. Anthony West
Liz Wielinski, Columbia Park, lizski@goldengate.net
Michael Guest, Powderhorn Park, msguest@gmail.com
Jon Olson, Victory, olsonforparks@gmail.com
Scott Vreeland, Seward, svattheriver@aol.com
Mike Wendorf, Downtown, mikewendorf@mac.com
Anita Tabb, Lowry Hill, anita@anitatabb.com
Steve Barland, Field, steve@barlandforparks.org
Carol Kummer, Nokomis East, carolkummer@earthlink.net
McClain Looney, Bryant, m@loonsoft.com
Dan Peterson, Hiawatha, peter423@umn.edu
Jason Stone, Diamond Lake, jason.stone@yahoo.com
Brad Bourn, CARAG, brad@bradbournforparks.org
Meg Forney, West Calhoun, megf@visi.com
Geneva Hanvik, Kingfield, hanv0005@umn.edu
Steven Jecha, Lynnhurst, steve@jecha.com