On May 18, 2017 I participated in the public forum, hosted by the Minneapolis Parks and Recreation Board (MPRB), about the future of the Hiawatha Golf Course. It was interesting, eye-opening, and frustrating. For those unfamiliar with the issue of the golf course, the concise explanation is that the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has limits on the volume of ground and storm water that can be pumped. Because much of the Hiawatha Golf Course lies below the water table and is a natural wetland, the MPRB must pump much more water than permitted to keep it dry enough to play golf. Thus far, the DNR has accommodated the excess pumping with temporary permits. Although these may be made permanent, most people involved in the project appear to agree that the DNR will not take that route. If the volume of pumped water is limited to the DNR guidelines, it will not be feasible to maintain an 18 hole golf course on the site. The Hiawatha Golf Course will be dead. At the moment it is on life support. Kept viable by pumps and pesticides. The point of the forum and all the others over the last 2 years since the devastating flood in 2014, was to determine what will be done with its corpse. Project manager and assistant superintendent Michael Schroeder presented 3 options that have been highlighted by the working group. Alternative A is a revamped 18 Hole Golf Course and Alternatives B1 and B2 are restored wetlands including different configurations of multi-use amenities. See the details here. The main difference between Alternatives A and B is the volume of water pumped. But the technical, legal, and regulatory details are not the focus of this post.
Ground water being pumped in Lake Hiawatha.
The public forum was conducted by randomly assigning attendees to a subgroup for discussion of the Alternatives. I participated in a subgroup of 10 that was comprised of 7 golf enthusiasts (Alternative A supporters) and 3 advocates of wetland restoration (Alternative B supporters). I support Alternative B1. Dissension within the group began with the introductions, primarily driven by two people that expressed their absolute disgust for the Alternative B ideas relating to multi-use and ecological benefits because they considered such notions ridiculous. Their distaste for the process by which the organizers hoped the meeting would be conducted – and the MPRB in general – made it clear that any serious discussion would be very hard to facilitate. Of the remaining golf course supporters, 4 were physically separated at one end of the rectangular table and they discussed park and city history among themselves for the rest of the meeting. One advocate of Alternative A was open to discussion, but mainly focused on emphasizing his perspective that because the President of the MPRB is married to a potential contractor that might be hired to design and build Alternatives B, the whole thing was a scam meant to enrich that family. Myself and the other 2 Alternative B fans sat on one side of the table directly across from the 2 disgusted golfers and the young man willing to discuss the potential corruption of the MPRB, who was the son of the most vocal and negative of the disgusted ones. It would be an understatement to say that the discussion did not go well. I admit that I did little to turn the discussion in a positive direction. I opted for confrontation by emphasizing the statistics suggesting that golf is an elitist sport popular with an aging demographic that is no longer viable enough to justify setting aside such a large parcel of public land. I convinced no one, but I sincerely doubt that any argument no matter how kindly presented would have swayed them. Likewise, there was no viable way to convince me that anything more than a 3 hole training course would be tolerable at Hiawatha. When the sub-groups gave their presentations at the end of the meeting it was clear that most were hobbled by the same polarization as ours. One presenter from another sub-group blamed this division on the MPRB and the process used to elicit public input. I do not agree. The split in public opinion is the reality. The public forums simply revealed it.
Lake Hiawatha – South Minneapolis
Despite the argument and division there were more than a few points of agreement and common ground, albeit not directly relevant to the discussion the MPRB hoped to stimulate among the participants. Most pressing was the agreement that no matter what the MPRB decides to do with the park, preventing or mitigating basement flooding in the neighborhood must be a result of the renovation. The most distressing of these was the sense, on both sides, that the public forums were a sham; a dog and pony show staged to make it appear as though the MPRB was considering public input, while they made decisions based on corruption and/or influence of lobbyists behind the scenes. The most encouraging point of agreement was that the use toxic pesticides and chemical fertilizers by the MPRB on the site, whether a golf course or a food forest, be ended. Another important piece of common ground was the idea that the park system has an educational role, especially for children and youth. A number of the golfers were concerned that the training and school programs that Hiawatha hosts would be lost or relocated to a course too far away to benefit local kids. The wetland restoration alternatives, especially those that include urban farm and food forest projects, offer important educational opportunities, too. Programs teaching kids (of all ages) how the natural systems in the park work to moderate flooding, provide habitat and food for humans and non-humans, as well as clean and maintain the water in the connected lakes are critical components of the proposed multi-use alternatives. The restoration of the wetland ecosystem as the site recovers from nearly 9 decades of abuse would provide a real world example of how humans can learn to work with nature rather than against it. Given the climate challenges facing humanity in the near future teaching the next generation to understand and appreciate the natural world seems so much more important than teaching them to play golf. I sincerely hope that the MPRB, the city of Minneapolis, and the people with which I share this land will begin to understand that the impending closure of Hiawatha Golf Course is more an opportunity than a tragic loss. In much the same way as fallen trees and deceased animals become the fodder for new life, the Hiawatha Golf Corpse will be reclaimed by the Earth as new life and new knowledge are nourished by its remains.
The MPRB plans one more public forum before the Board takes their decision in July. Stay tuned.
May 23, 2017 at 5:59 pm
Hey Brixton. I am the young man that was at your table that you mention in this blog. To set the record straight, I was never sure of the rumors that I have heard and said I needed to do some more research to find out the details of the rumor. Turns out the person who told me also was mistaken with what they have heard. I do not want to have this blow out of proportion and spread misinformation. It is critical that in at time full of fake news that we make sure that rumors do not go far if they have no merit. After I looked into it, the rumors are completely baseless and without merit. There are no conflict of interest and everything is public information you can verify I am sure.
I also have no opinion on which alternative we choose, I am open to both and was clearly seeing the pros and cons for both. The main thing I was trying to do there at the table was make sure all sides were heard.
May 23, 2017 at 7:29 pm
Thanks for reaching out, Tyler. I was careful not to mention any names in the article because I did not want to put people on the spot. I did a little research on the issue you raised. The man is retired and Anita Tabb is not seeking reelection in 2017. If you take a few moments to look around this site, you’ll notice that changing the MPRB in the next election is one of my main goals. The Board has a serious lack of transparency, especially with regard to budgetary issues. Again, thanks for commenting. I appreciated your comments at the meeting. Ultimately, I think the main determinant of the fate of Hiawatha Golf Course will be the MN DNR. If they approve the level of groundwater pumping needed to keep the golf course, I have little doubt that is what the MPRB will do. You should realize that the Food Forest idea originated in the local community and the MPRB has been somewhat dismissive of the plan. I was surprised any mention of such was included in Alternative B.
May 24, 2017 at 5:56 am
Thank you for the summary Brixton.
Some major aspects of the proposed plans for the land also included finally mitigating the major storm sewer system that dumps pollution and trash from south Minneapolis, unfiltered into the Lake after every rain. This problem has been ignored over the 9 decades as well. This proposed action I celebrate.
Another aspect of the alternative B plans is the re-meandering of Minnehaha Creek. In the maps presented, the Creek is diverted away from its current outlet into Lake Hiawatha and instead enters the Lake on its west side. This is a major re-engineering of the Land. And caution should be used in engineering efforts, because the problems we face now are the result of the overzealous engineering that occurred in the past. Part of that engineering was straightening the Creek. I support the goal of creating more opportunities to clean up Lake Hiawatha. I support the re-meandering of the Creek. It would allow the Creek to drop sediment and pollution before it reaches the Lake. The downside of this plan is that diverting the Creek will take water flow away from existing habitat that wildlife residents rely on. The system of life that allows the diversity of wildlife that currently call Lake Hiawatha home, includes, beavers, muskrats, mink, turtles, waterfowl, herons, owls, eagles, hawks, cormorants, crawfish, birds…etc. Lake Hiawatha was home to a family of fox a few years ago and some have said they have seen otters there. All of this wildlife relies on the delta area formed in the Lake by Minnehaha Creek. It is one of the few areas that has enough privacy and diversity to support the wildlife ecology. It may be that the original course of the Creek was further north 9 decades ago, but in those nine decades the delta has naturalized and has become habitat with several wetland areas dependent on the branching of Creek flow for flushing out areas and keeps those wetlands from becoming stagnant.
Therefore I am asking the MCWD who would do this work to consider the possibility of yes, re-meandering the Creek but returning it to its current outlet to save the current wildlife population and allow the proposed new wetlands to be repopulated by the diverse wildlife residents that Lake Hiawatha has struggled to produce and preserve over these 9 decades. Basically I am asking that wildlife have representation in the process going forward. Myself and Friends of Lake Hiawatha intend to host a discussion to examine the implications of the proposed diversion of the Creek, with an eye toward wildlife preservation. You are invited to join us. I think intelligent planning based on the existing ecology can create a solution that can preserve and protect existing wildlife, restore water quality and keep trash out of the Lake.
thanks, Sean
May 24, 2017 at 6:57 am
Thanks for filling out the story, Sean. The apparent loss of the golf course will provide a great opportunity to bring a centerpiece of the Minneapolis Parks System more in tune with the natural cycles of the water shed. It seems that the MPRB is beginning to take notice of the strong desire on the part of the wetland to reestablish itself at Hiawatha. Clean water is the basis of life.