[Mpls] Re: Fantasy Group Needs New Members: Above the Falls Citizen Advisory Committee

[Dyna Sluyter]

On Wednesday, June 2, 2004, at 10:17 AM, Svattheriver at aol.com wrote:

> I welcome interest and debate concerning the Above the Falls Master  
> Plan.

	And debate is badly needed- the plan is clearly the work of an insular 
group of planners with no budget concerns whatsoever.

> The seat I was elected to is  as a neighborhood representative of all 
> the
> neighborhoods in the Mississippi  Watershed (formerly the Middle 
> Mississippi
> Watershed).  It is the largest  geographic area represented, so I 
> really
> appreciate this forum as a way of  communicating.

	So could we Northsiders make these decisions ourselves without the 
inevitable meddling of the more gentrified neighborhoods who think they 
know what's best for us?

> Major Benefits of Plan Implementation
> 90 acres of new park

	While the Park Board can't afford to maintain what they already have. 
Sounds like a plan to expand Weed Park upriver...

>  15 milesof bike lanes and recreational trails

	Again, where will the $$$ come to maintain this?

> 4 miles of restored  riverbank

	Does your committee even know where the original riverbank is?

> 5.25 miles of parkway and boulevard

	To nowhere...

> 2,500 housing units in new  riverfront neighborhoods

	Affordable if you make over $100,000 a year....

> 2,000 net additional jobs

	lost. Where are these new jobs going to come from? If you'd looked at 
the plan you'd see that it calls for leveling block after block of 
businesses. Do you have commitments from any business that will move 
here to replace the jobs your plan will eliminate?

> Over $10 million in  additional annual tax revenue

	Probably lost when we take tax paying property and turn it into park 
land.

>> Dyna says: AFCAC doesn't  represent, " the thousands of ordinary 
>> working
> folks that will lose their
> jobs if the plan is ever implemented."
> AFCAC is a really interesting  group of people that does include the 
> people
> that Dyna say are excluded.
> For  example there are members from American Iron, La Farge 
> Corporation,
> Marshall  Concrete and Aggregate industries who are representing heavy 
> industry.

	They represent business, not workers... sorry, but you're republican 
platitudes won't fly here.

> As for  blue collar workers and ordinary working folks they are 
> represented on
> the board  by myself and others.

	The Teamsters, AFSCME, UTU, BLE, IBEW, APWU, LUINA, and several other 
unions have thousands of members who work along the upper river, Which 
of these unions and their members do you represent?

> The Upper Harbor Terminal has- I think 5 employees- and is a financial 
>  drain
> on the City.

	Because it has been neglected and poorly managed.

> There is a current study about what to do when and if the
> Harbor Closes. I think that it can be closed if there is a place to 
> dump dredge
> spoils.

	There is a lot more moving at Port of Minneapolis than dirt- have you 
ever been there?

> Whether it should be closed or not is a much larger  question.

	Indeed it is- communities all over western Minnesota rely on Port of 
Minneapolis as an outlet for their crops. We need alliances with those 
communities at the legislature, and closing the Port will produce such 
ill will that those outstate legislators will seek revenge against 
Minneapolis for years to come. BTW, have any of your board members ever 
followed the river down to the last lock? Or followed the railroads 
that feed Port of Minneapolis out to the Dakotas? I have, but I'm just 
a dumb working stiff that needs smart people like your board to decide 
stuff for me...

> Housing-, our metro population is predicted to increase by one million 
> in
> the near future.

	And they can't afford the luxury condos along the river your plan 
envisions.

> Dyna says:  "This plan is years  old and that has yet to happen... says
> something of
> the interest in said  plan."
> There is interest and funding. To name a few:
> There is the Grain Belt Complex with a great new library on the  river.
> The wonderful North Interpretive Center and Park.

	That was a separate project.

> GAF received a grant to implement a more environmentally friendly  
> presence
> on the River.

	Given that the plan calls for leveling GAF, is this a waste of money 
or admission that the plan is being abandoned?

> Close architects are putting the final touches on plans for trail and  
> park
> improvements for Skyline Park and the western shoreline between the  
> Plymouth
> and the BN bridge.

	As if the Park Board could afford it.

> There is funding for major stormwater improvements in the Hawthorne
> neighborhood.

	And if my block is leveled for that where will I and my neighbors find 
affordable housing? Hopefully your park will at least have some picnic 
shelters for us to sleep under...

> There is a masterplan and a funding for Edgewater Park
> (Gluek park is an unfunded tragedy)

	So how can we afford to develop Edgewater park when we can't even 
afford to fence off, never mind decontaminate, Gluek Park?

> There is an Army Corps Plan for pool one (this area) that would  
> greatly
> improve the health of the river.
> There is an additional 11.2 million dollars from the Mississippi 
> Watershed
> Management Organization 10 year capital improvement plan slated for 
> the  Above
> the Falls Plan.
> There is 1.9 million from the National Park Service MNRRA area which
> includes the AFCAC area.

	So after years of lobbying you've got 13.1 million dollars allocated 
for a $1,000,000,000+ plan. Looks like it's time to send that overly 
ambitious plan back to the drawing board!

	From River Mile 856, west bank...

		Dyna Sluyter