REACHING ACROSS THE AISLE

Mayor Longrie recently sent this letter to Representative Seifert the House minority leader. Senator Wiger, Representative Slawik and Representative Lillie (Maplewood's elected representatives) have been working to see if they can come up with money to help purchase some land in the very southern end of Maplewood which would provide additional protection around Fish Creek and the upper bluff area over looking the Mississippi River. The Mayor has spoken many times about her belief that it is extremely important to preserve this area. She has also worked to try to place conservation easements on all of Maplewood's parks and open spaces, with very little success. The Mayor's letter is in red, my comments are in blue.


Hearing TODAY for HF 2055
From: mayorlongrie@yahoo.com
Sent: Tue 3/31/09 10:44 AM
To: rep.marty.seifert@house.mn

Greetings!
I am writing to Rep. Seifert ( why does she start by saying that she is writing to Rep. Seifert, after all she sent it to him, didn't she) and The Citizens' Reporter about the above referenced file to be heard today. I read information about the time on Mr. Nephew's blog site ( seems odd her reference to Mr Nephew's blog. does she assume that Rep. Seifert is a regular reader?) and in a separate email received from Rep.Slawik. Unfortunately, I am engaged elsewhere and I am unable to attend. Rep. Slawik mentioned in her email that Peter Fischer and John Nephew are expected to testify.
It will be interesting to see if they testify as individual citizens or if they introduce themselves as speaking in their official capacity. Peter Fischer is Chair of the Parks Commission as a citizen volunteer and John Nephew serves as an elected council member. (Why is this interesting? Why would they not use their titles? The Mayor used her title first thing in this email.
mayorlongrie@yahoo.com )

Neither Fischer or Nephew, from my recollection, have spoke in support of conservation easements for the neighborhood preserves Maplewood currently owns after purchasing the same with voter referendum money for open space lands. Just recently, the Priory Preserve comes to mind. Neither supported the preservation of this open space parcel, from development, by use of a conservation easement - citing, to paraphrase, that a conservation easement is too permanent and not "flexible" enough. At our last Council meeting the council voted 4 to 1 to move forward on placing a conservation easement on the Priory Preserve - Mr. Nephew was
the sole dissenting vote on the motion. ( Couple of questions. What does this have to do with the effort to find money to acquire additional open space? Is the Mayor so fixated on preserving the land we already own that she can not see the environmental advantage of obtaining additional land? Also this is written as if Rep. Seifert would know something about the Priory Open Space, odd)

However, both Fischer and Nephew have previously spoke in favor of the Co-Par development of the Fish Creek area located in the Mississippi Critical Area of south Maplewood.. Prior to his election, some observed Mr. Nephew as being very "chummy" with the Co-Par representatives at the south leg meetings at Carver School held during the 1year long+ development moratorium. ( yes, by all means you do not want to be friendly towards people.)Then upon his election, Nephew was the swing vote to change the council vote to permit the development to proceed forward and Co-Par received the approvals they sought for a planned unit development (PUD) of approximately 174 houses.( a proposal that far exceeded Maplewood's requirements for setbacks, water run off, bluff protection, and protection of Fish Creek. The proposal was also for considerably fewer houses than allowed by Maplewood's codes.)

Now Fischer and Nephew are in favor of "saving" Fish Creek after they supported Co-Par's plan to develop the bluffs, Fish Creek and surrounding area. ( as stated above the proposal did not develop the bluffs or certainly not Fish Creek. It did develop the surrounding area.) If the Maplewood receives the money to buy the land, what are the guarantees the land will be preserved?( they would be the same as all the other open space areas Maplewood has, none of which has been sold to anyone, or perhaps we could give the land to Ramsey County who owns all of the adjoining open space.) I don't believe the bill requires conservation easements be placed on the land. Before moving forward any further, the proposed bill should be amended to include at least a perminent preservation requirement. ( I wonder if Yellowstone is under a conservation easement, nah, probably not.)

If "given" the money, Maplewood will buy the land (from Co-Par) and Co-Par, who just had more of their properties elsewhere lost in a foreclosure sale held on March 24th, will benefit from the 2.4 to 4.8 million dollars so they can have their own personal bailout in Maplewood. ( Here in America we do not what any companies to profit and we particularly love to beat a man when they are down.) By the way, Co-Par bought the entire parcel (not just the Fish Creek portion) at the inflated price of just under 7 million. If I recall correctly, the entire parcel they purchased was approximately 72 acres with 1/3 of it unbuildable because of wetlands, bluffs and set backs. ( now didn't she just say up above that their plan develops the bluffs, and Fish Creek? Now those same areas are not buildable. )I do not understand the legislation to be providing enough funds to purchase the entire parcel - only a portion.( If we can not set aside all of it we don't want any. We certainly do not want to be able to collect any taxes to help offset the amount of taxes the rest of the citizens in Maplewood have to pay.)
The South Maplewood property (Fish Creek) may possibly be the only property that Co-Par has remaining of their vast real estate portfolio. They started to lose their properties to lender foreclosures over a year ago.( This information is important to Rep. Seifert in what way?)
This "bailout" is at a time when we have a state deficit and we are planning to cut education and health care programs that are needed by many. We need to prioritize.( the money that funds the programs listed by the Mayor comes from other sources. The funds for preserving land will be allotted so why is the Mayor against Maplewood attempting to get our share?)
My efforts for preservation of our natural resources in Maplewood is well documented. This legislative effort does little to that end.( I agree this does nothing to help feather the Mayor's resume.) The "bailout" money will simply serve to be the seed money to commence the Fish Creek (Co-Par) development that ultimately will harm (in my opinion) ( finally she admits this is all opinion.) the bluffs and Fish Creek of Maplewood.


Best Regards,
Diana Longrie


The Mayor's letter is clearly not intended for Representative Seifert. He is not on any of the committees involved in the funding process. The letter is not written in a fashion that would have meaning to someone outside of Maplewood. This letter is intended for only one propose and that is to poison the efforts of others who are working to do what the Mayor only talks about, the preservation of open space in Maplewood. Although the Mayor is viewed unfavorably by most other elected officials I have met, her letter will almost certainly take Maplewood out of the running for this funding. There are many cities which are seeking the money in a well organized, united fashion and the legislatures do not have time to sort out what is happening in Maplewood.
This is why we need a new Mayor.

UPDATE 4-1-09: Mr Nephew comments That it must be an April Fools joke.