Letter to the Mayor, Council President, and Park and Rec Director

Dear Mayor Coleman, City Council President Lantry, and Parks and Rec Director Michael Hahm,

I have serious concerns about the choices that are being made about where to spend and where to cut dollars in regards to Parks and Rec.

It is a despicable choice to cut $3.8 million for the Park and Rec Department as a whole while planning to spend almost $8 million to rebuild the Como Pool. This situation is disturbingly familiar. I watched as millions were poured into the Jimmy Lee Recreation Center while other centers were closed, center budgets slashed, and staffing and programming were dramatically cut at remaining Rec Centers. The current situation with Como Pool reeks of the same inequity. Why do some neighborhoods get priority over others in the City of St. Paul budget? Some have said the Como Pool gets priority because it is a revenue stream for the city. When did Parks and Rec become about profit rather than service to the community?

I do not understand what benefit to the community is provided by Como Pool that can off-set the damage other communities will sustain as a result of closed or crippled Rec Centers. It has already been admitted that crime will increase as a result of the stress of these difficult times. What has failed to be admitted is the additional increase in crime as a result of closed Rec Centers. Block clubs are already fighting a daily battle against gangs and graffiti. They work tirelessly with police in these efforts but already find the SPPD ability to help limited due to lack of officers. When rec centers close, our youth will have nowhere to go to avoid being solicited by gangs. We might as well post gang sign-up sheets on the doors of the closed buildings! Oh yes, and now there will be even fewer officers to respond to the crimes committed by the growing gangs. Also, the proposed Park and Rec budget reductions will result in the loss of several jobs. Will those job losses be off-set by employment opportunities at the Como Pool? I'd venture to guess not. At this difficult time, why would the city lay off these people for the sake of pool construction? Please remind me how the investment in the Como Pool is benefiting me and my community.

Our community also has some recent experience with the CIB process which leads me to question the Como Pool funding process. A local block club just submitted a CIB proposal to initiate a study of the Margaret Rec Center facility so that a determination can be made about whether to resolve the long list of facility issues by renovation or rebuilding. The proposal must undergo months of review and if approved funds will not be available until 2010 or 2011. It would then take a year or two for the study process and resubmission of a proposal for the recommended renovation or construction costs. It is estimated that it will take 5+ years before any action would occur. However, when Como Pool closed at the end of last summer there hadn't even been a determination about whether to repair or rebuild the pool. Yet, they have already been granted $200,000 for conversations about what to do and another $7.2 million is already set aside for construction to be completed before summer of 2010. Why does Como Pool enjoy less scrutiny and a much more rapid process than our East Side rec center? Again, why are some neighborhoods and facilities given more priority than others? I am deeply disturbed about the inequities across the city.

As a voting constituent of the city I charge you to re-examine the proposed cuts and expenditures in the Park and Rec portion of the city budget. Council President Lantry, I challenge you not to vote to approve any budget which does not share expenditures and cuts evenly across all neighborhoods in St. Paul. Let it be said of the City of St. Paul that this is a place where leaders care equally for all citizens and truly strive to serve all citizens - even, and maybe especially, during hard times.

Mayor's Proposed Budget Means Big Losses for the Eastside

Mayor Coleman has unveiled his weakly veiled budget proposal today. One could say it has been slashed with a hatchet. I am still wondering if we are playing a game of political posturing. Are citizens being set up like pawns to try to create a checkmate for the Governor? Is Coleman threatening these things while casting the blame on the governor in an attempt to raise public ire toward the Governor and deflect it from himself? (He is currently running for re-election after all) Later Coleman could swoop in, reduce the terrible cuts, and come out like a hero. He won't be a hero in my book - a back stabber never could be.

The proposal calls for gross cuts to police, fire, public works, libraries, and rec centers. The East Side is already suffering with the services at their current levels. The cuts will be devastating! Let's just take the rec centers for an example: During the last round of cuts the East Side lost 2 of it's 12 rec centers. The new proposed cuts would remove 3 more rec centers leaving only 7 of the original 12! And this plan comes from a guy who has appeared countless times at community events all over the East Side only to boast about his passion for youth and his commitment to providing off-school hours programming for them. Instead, fewer rec centers means more youth out on the streets, joining gangs, and doing crimes. How will our reduced police force deal with that!?! Mayor Coleman the buck stops with you and any City Council members who vote to pass your back-stabbing budget!

The Dirty Half-Dozen

Be on the lookout for egg-throwing punks in the eastern part of Dayton's Bluff. At least four garages were served a late breakfast, and we suspect it was by the graffiti tagging troupe. Hash browns are extra.

What happened to 662 Duluth?

662 Duluth, the location of the first homicide of 2009 in St. Paul , is one of the oldest homes on this side of the Bluff; the land was platted in 1883 and the green Cape Cod style home was built in 1884. The structure sits upon what used to be a (nearly) double lot that slopes pretty severely to the west and slightly to the south. This map from the Ramsey County archives shows the home in 2003. Note the garage on the northwest corner of the property (on what is now 664 Duluth).

I can't speak to the condition of the house at this time, but the house has some historic value in the neighborhood and the large lot would have made it attractive for buyers looking to have a decent-sized yard in a crowded city. According to the Star Tribune's information on real estate transactions over the past ten years, the property last sold on 12/17/1999 for $75,000. I don't know if it was owner occupied after that purchase or rented out. Regardless, the property still had value as a single-family home with a garage and large lot.

On 1/26/2005, the St. Paul City Council approved that the lot could be split, clearly for the purposes of building a new home. Here are the entries for 662 Duluth on the St. Paul Property Information web site:

It's the first entry (later in date) that troubles me. First, both 662 Duluth and the new home at 664 Duluth needed variances in order to fit on the two lots. In an area that often has many homes crammed together, I think that granting a variance for smaller lots would not be showing good stewardship of the neighborhood. I say "would" because according to these records, the variances were never actually granted: the request expired. I may be misreading these records, and I'll try and do some further research to see what actually happened.

So, with the two lots and the need to put in a new home, the garage was torn down and two concrete slabs were put down in its place to provided parking for the new homes. Here's a satellite view after the home was built:

(image from Google Maps)

As you can see, the two homes are abutting each other with little space between. Even worse, neither home has a garage and they share a driveway. Both properties have now lost significant appeal as single-family homes. 662 Duluth has almost no usable yard; what's left are the portions that are downward sloping. They both seem doomed to a life as rental properties (in no way meant to be a knock against rental properties, but the East Side had a glut of them in 2005 and did not need two more).

Four years after the decision to turn a neighborhood asset into cramped living space, we have drug dealing; we have a murder. Are they connected? Maybe. But certainly, our community lost some value to the gain of a developer.

Here are some street views of the property:

View Larger Map




View Larger Map