Whether or not I'm appointed to either Commission, I will still remain interested in the goings-on in my City, which so far has escaped the turmoil of the East Bethel self-interested bullies' coup, the divided hostilities in Ham Lake, and the insiders' games being played in Oak Grove. Even the Anoka County Board has seen an upside-down circumstance as the right-wingers, including new Commissioners Look and Westerberg - representing parts of Andover - have formed a four-vote coalition at the expense of solid old-guarders like Erhart and Kordiak. Bad enough that the slimy Mr. Look is on this Board, but now they've brought their politics into play by ousting Dan Erhart, the most prominent transit figure and rail advocate on the Board from even continuing to have a role with that part of the County's business. What crumbs are they leaving for Kordiak and Erhart - I suppose they get to oversee a water fowl census in the County or something?
This coming week, the Park & Recreation Commission holds its first meeting of 2011. Afterwards, they will be conducting a Commission planning-workshop for 2011.
Thoughts that I've had:
- With the Skateboard Park and new rinks by City Hall, there are 68 parks or recreation sites in the City, I believe - a tremendous figure...
- As I mentioned in my interview, I think the City needs to communicate better about its parks; perhaps one means of doing so - depending on the budget and cost involved (but perhaps over a 3-4 year budget period) - is to invest in signage that directs drivers to key roads where parks are located, perhaps with pictures/symbols to reflect which have ballfields or skating rinks or picnic tables or playground equipment, as an example...
- I live near a small park, presumably required of our developer in Chesterton Commons North 7-10 years ago; it's 1.04 acres on a non-through, hidden portion of Avocet St. in the 15800 block. Named Oak View Park, it simply has playground equipment for young children. But it's not terribly convenient for use by even neighbors of mine a couple of blocks away. It is hidden - it's next to open space on a block that's only easily visible to the homes nearest it. There's a closed off, possible road extension next to the park, but there's no apparent path or trail that would involve the neighboring blocks, behind the weeds and trees on Wintergreen to use this park, too. The park is not intended for use by older elementary or middle school-aged children; the open space doesn't even include a home-made ballfield like kids made in the Coon Rapids I grew up in nearly 50 years ago. Instead the older kids play in our street, play in the yards, use our pond in winter, skate off the driveways, etc. How many other parks are like this in Andover? What is the usage?
- What about a relatively-hidden away park like Forest Meadows, which looked so quiet and unappreciated when we campaigned in that neighborhood - 179th and Unity - last fall? I had no idea there were soccer fields there - I only saw some lonely picnic tables - seemingly in the middle of nowhere - and why? What would be the attraction to go there to picnic? I'm at a loss...
- Assuming that most parks are aimed at children and families, and that the most popular season (but realizing some have specific fall or spring sports, and winter activities enjoyed there) to use the parks begins in late Spring through about Labor Day (or thereabouts), I'd like to suggest that the City hire a summer intern to monitor and survey some of the parks we already realize are not as heavily used as sites like Prairie Knoll and Andover Station. I suggest hiring an individual for 15 weeks to monitor parks in five week-blocks. I think they should visit five different parks each week, for five weeks, then go back to the same parks for the next five weeks, and then once more for a third set of five weeks. This would give us data on twenty-five Andover parks' usage through the late-Spring into the early-fall. They could visit the five parks in any given week up to four tinmes a day, recording who and how many users at each part of the day - such as between 10 and Noon, between 1 and 3, between 3 and 5 and between 5 and 7. Over two hours they could observe each park for about 15 minutes at a time, then drive to the next site, hopefully just minutes away, for the next observation period. Watching a park at four different times a day, for a full week, then repeating the pattern five weeks and ten weeks later would give the City a great deal of data to consider for near-future planning for the parks...
- Why do we use parks? And if we don't use our parks, why are they there or why do we maintain them?
- We have many parks in southern Andover, where the City first grew up. But so did those neighborhoods. Now certainly there are nice anecdotal stories of grandparents taking grandchildren to those parks, but are there neighborhood familes and children regularly in those parks? Let's find out...
- I'm not advocating closing and selling off our parks. Someday, Andover's neighborhoods may turn over and younger familes move back into neighborhoods needing that park space. But, do we keep turning over the equipment in those parks when the demographics suggest there aren't the users in the vicinity that are needed to make those expenses worthwhile?
- We have parks where neighborhoods have aged, and we lack parks - or proper types of parks in many parts of Andover where the younger families - and users - have moved in. Take the area near Rum River Elementary - recognizing the school has lots of park-like facility there, but then note the four parks in that large neighborhood between Round Lake and Hanson Blvds. and 161st northward. There's Hawk Ridge at the north end - nice new upgrade of rinks and ballfields- with a playground and picnic area; White Oaks - undeveloped; Woodland Meadows - very tiny with playground only; and Lund's North - baseball field only. If you live just off of Round Lake Blvd. or if you live northeast of the school, as my in-laws do, the park and recreation choices are not so close, and not so easy to determine...
- If we're not already getting demographics from the school districts to add in our analysis, then I must advocate doing this as well. The school districts know where the children are and what their ages are. They need to for determining school boundaries and bus routes. Well, so should the city, so it can plan its park and recreation choices smartly. If an area has too few young children, and the parks closest to that area only offer young child-oriented playgrounds, isn't there something we can do to address this? Can't we either determine if there are more age-appropriate choices for that neighborhood park, or can we change that park's nature by perhaps moving the playground equipment where it would be better-served, and bringing in something like the picnic facilities or tennis and basketball courts to that area? I am woefully unaware of the costs and work involved in such a suggestion, but I don't necessarily look at this as a quick fix - these are changes we should consider planning and budgeting for over a four, five, six year period - recognizing that in a decade or 15 years, the current "young areas" will have aged, as well, and a new cycle of park changes will be needed and necessary for a new group of leaders to consider...
City leaders are there to govern; I don't think that means they were elected or appointed to reduce government, to watch how much is spent or to turn back someone's idea of what a lot of us call progress. I think government is best when we do, when we act - and do it smartly. I think we can decide if there are parks that need simply be cut, mowed, weeded, etc. while others get improved facilities and equipment on an appropriate timetable. I think we can decide that there are important city expenditures on the horizon, and that for the common good of all of us, there may be a need to finance those changes on the citizens of this City. There are many here in Andover who will not agree, and will be adamantly opposed to doing so - and look at our neighbors and our new County Board - but those people are not governing the needs of their City - they're simply watching their own and their friends. wallets and putting that ahead of progressing their City through its natural course of change and improvement. I envision leadership in the mode of a progressive like Theodore Roosevelt, someone who would be hostily opposed by his own Republican Party today. I strongly recommend a recent - and long - book by Douglas Brinkley - Theodore Roosevelt: Wilderness Warrior - to learn about the power and art of governing, of change-making, of putting right and progress ahead of political expediency.
