As I have done in the past, I offer this position paper so that citizens, city staff, and other elected officials are aware of my thinking on various issues involving the city of Maplewood. My positions grow from the comments and input that I have heard over the years from citizens, city staff, and professional people in fields relevant to city issues and activities, such as land planners, legal advisers, business associations, and civic management instructors.
The value of experience
While some would have you believe that I don’t listen to people and only advance my own agenda, the fact is my positions have steadily evolved over the twenty years I have been serving Maplewood. With each passing year my knowledge and prospective have grown, and in many cases changed. When I first started serving on the city’s Planning Commission I was in fact concerned about my own agenda. I had decided to get involved for personal reasons. I did not want any more traffic on my street. I didn’t want any more people to move into my neighborhood. I didn’t want businesses anywhere close to residential neighborhoods, to name a few. Only through listening to others did I come to realize and accept that most of my personal views were not necessarily in the best interest of the city. Many of my more vocal critics seem to be where I was twenty years ago. They are more concerned about what they think should or should not happen instead of what is best for the common good of the city.
Parks and open space
On occasion the discussion comes up that we need to further protect our open spaces. The suggested means of doing this is to apply conservation easements to those land parcels. In doing this control of Maplewood’s land would be turned over to an independent organization that we then pay to tell us what we can and cannot do with our land. These easements last forever (really, I mean it -- until the end of time). What right do we have to make irrevocable decisions for the people that will live in Maplewood after we are gone? How could we possibly even imagine what the needs and desires of those people will be? Currently if any change of use for the open spaces were to come before the city, a lengthy process would have to take place involving, at minimum, our Planning, Parks, and Environmental Commissions and three public hearings before the City Council. The council would then have to approve the change by a 4 to 1 vote. My position is that the city should continue to have the amount of open space that we currently have. If an opportunity were to come forward that would allow us to improve the city and maintain our stock of open space, it should be discussed. I am not aware of any such opportunities at this time.
Our Parks Department is on the rebound. Three years ago the Parks Department was eliminated from the city. I very much disagreed with this move and was happy to be able to find a way to start returning this very important part of the city’s services to our operations. I believe that the role of the Parks Department in providing activities for the young and the young at heart is a powerful force in the health of the city. In order for the citizens of Maplewood to feel good about living here they need to be satisfied with their quality of life. Our parks, open spaces, the programs that we offer through the Community Center, and our recreational programs are major contributors to that quality. We need to continue to reinvest in our parks and open space management, equipment, and programs. I believe that even in these hard times we need to provide funding on a continuing basis to maintain our existing parks and open spaces and continue to reestablish a full department.
The Community Center has been a source of debate since its inception. I view the Center in the same way as I view all the other parks in the city -- as an amenity that makes Maplewood a better place to live. All of our parks require a subsidy from the city. In the recent past the Community Center has received about $300,000 annually. It is projected to need about $220,000 in 2010. Certainly we need to continue to explore and review operations and fees, but I believe that the quality of life factors that are inherent in recreation and activities for Maplewood’s citizens need to be part of that discussion.
Public safety
The police and the amount of police coverage in different parts of the city are discussed from time to time. First let me say that on each opportunity that I have had, I have voted to maintain and improve our Police Department. It is true that we do not have the same level of police presence in all parts of the city. We do not have enough officers to provide that type of service. The city’s police are put where we have crime. A lot of crime equals a lot of police. Other than the peace of mind that a resident may momentarily feel to see a patrol car go by, there is no public safety advantage to extra patrols in a neighborhood that does not have a crime problem. The staff costs to provide enough officers for this level of coverage are not worth the benefit received. My position is that we should be staffing our police force to maintain the national average of 1.5 sworn officers per 1000 residents. With the current economic conditions this is not the time to increase the number of authorized sworn officers. We should, however, fill the two current open officer positions.
In the Fire Department we currently use a mix of full time and paid per call firefighters. This mix is the result of a long history in Maplewood. We started with several volunteer departments, which were combined into one paid per call city department. More recently we added some full time personnel to insure good around the clock coverage. The Fire Department, along with some help from the Police Department, also provides the emergency medical coverage for the city. I support the continued use of this hybrid model.
Government transparency
Transparency in government has been a topic that has gotten a lot of discussion at all government levels in the last several years. In my position paper from 2005 I talked about Democratic Governance, which is nothing more than finding good ways to involve the citizens in the governing process. I believe that this is extremely important and is required to fully represent the citizens' desires as Maplewood moves forward. Maplewood’s problem at the moment is that we have given too much emphasis to a small group of people in the city. I do not believe that this group’s views are the views of the majority of the citizens of Maplewood. In order to reflect the majority's view we need to hear from people beyond the select few who attend the council meetings or are frequent speakers at visitor presentations. I would advocate for setting up a citywide survey, which we have done in the past, to get input from a wide range of citizens. This information is critical to help the council assess which programs, activities, and projects are important to the citizens. Only with wide-ranging input can we make decisions that reflect the majority’s wishes while respecting various minority views.
Another side of transparency is giving the citizens the ability to view the process of governance. Maplewood has been continually improving the means for this to happen. We televise all public meetings and provide a tremendous amount of information online, along with the Maplewood Monthly and informational handouts on various topics at City Hall. The current effort to improve upon a citizen’s ability to view proceedings and research information is online streaming. This will not only allow you to watch a meeting in real time, but you will be able to go back to past meetings and review a single agenda item of interest. This will be a great asset to interested citizens. I support the continued efforts to involve as many citizens as possible in the government process, while remembering that the council is elected to represent all citizens whether they participate directly or not.
Goal setting
How can you run a large organization without setting goals? For the last four years the council has never met to set goals for the city. In my view this must change. I believe many of the problems that the city council has had during the last four years can be traced back to having no unified direction for the city. This affects not only the council’s ability to work together but also the city staff’s ability to use city resources in an efficient manner. I believe that the council’s first order of business in 2010 needs to be to hold a series of workshops to identify common goals that we have for the city, prioritize those goals, and identify benchmarks that we can use to track progress. This will go a long way towards fostering a cooperative environment for the council, the citizens, and the staff to work together and move the city forward.
Role of Mayor
I believe that the role of the Mayor in Maplewood is not understood by either the last couple of mayors or by many of the citizens of the city. In Maplewood the mayor is a council member. They have only one vote and no veto power. The mayor can only lead through creating an atmosphere that allows the city council to do its job. The city council meetings are meant to be the business meeting of the city at which the council attends to the people's business. There has to be consideration given to conducting that business in a set amount of time. It is not necessary to have council meetings running to midnight or two in the morning. This does not mean that we should rush through issues or not get all the comments from interested individuals. What the mayor, as chair of the meeting, must do is clearly convey to all the participants the agenda topic and the need to stay on topic, along with expecting the City Manager to have laid the proper groundwork with the city commissions and staff. Conducting the people's business openly, efficiently, and effectively is an area which the mayor has the responsibility to control, and is important for everyone involved that the mayor does so.
Development
Did you know that at one time the land use plan for Maplewood was set up to allow for a population of 90,000 people? Today it appears that we will be at less than one half of that amount as we finish initial development. Although there maybe some significant localized increases in density as the city redevelops chances are the majority of us will not be here to see it.
I believe that development or redevelopment in a city is necessary and good for the city. There is no single activity that brings in more funding to the city than development. Our parks, our infrastructure, our land values, our tax base, and the city’s fee revenue all benefit from development. New development also tends to bring another housing alternative to add to the wide variety that Maplewood currently has. The impact on jobs is far greater than the jobs that a small business would generate in many years of operation. There are the direct jobs of trades people building the sites, but also those developments need paint, flooring, cabinets appliances, furniture, etc. and the new residents will probably need to eat, buy clothes… you get the idea.
So although I am happy that we are not a city of 90,000 I do and will support development as a general rule. Each development has to be individually reviewed to insure that it will be a good fit for Maplewood. But with all the advantages which can be enjoyed by Maplewood and its residents from the development process, it would be foolish not to look for the opportunities that will continue to make Maplewood a better place to live.
Summary
I believe that if you are a typical resident of Maplewood that you did not find any of the positions or ideas that I have discussed above to be anything that is overly controversial, or way to the right or left of an issue. That is because the vast majority of the residents of Maplewood are people that are middle of the road. You appreciate common sense, are willing to listen, and are open to others' ideas. So am I. That is why I would be a good mayor.
