| Sign up | Log in | Forgot Password |
Your Voice in support of Park Reform Has Been Heard !
By Philadelphia Parks Alliance <friends@philaparks.org>
Wednesday, 09/14/05
(1126737188514)
Thank you to Philadelphia's citizens and organizations for taking action in favor of park reform but opposed to a rushed Charter change vote on November 8 to consolidate the Fairmount Park Commission and the Department of Recreation .
Your letters, phone calls, visits and 132 organizational and 1,080 individual endorsements of PPA's Resolution in favor of thoughtful park reform were extremely effective during what we think of as Phase 1 of this process.
Thank you to Councilmembers Darrell Clarke and Blondell Reynolds Brown for championing park reform and listening to the concerns of citizens!
Over the summer, the Parks Alliance and other stakeholders met with sponsors Blondell Reynolds Brown and Darrell Clarke to talk about constituents' concerns about City Council Bill No. 050697. Yesterday afternoon Councilwoman Reynolds Brown called the Parks Alliance to tell us that she and Councilman Clarke have heard our coalition and that this issue will not be on the November 8 ballot . Clarke and Reynolds Brown will reintroduce the Bill when City Council reconvenes tomorrow (Thursday, September 15) with the goal of including a Charter change question on the May 2006 ballot. The Councilwoman explained that public hearings will be held later this fall, and that from now until Council recesses on December 15, she and Councilman Clarke will work to "galvanize support" and create "a more tactical document to take the strategic plan to its next phase."
The Parks Alliance looks forward to an informed, inclusive and transparent dialogue with City Council and the Administration; park stakeholders; experts and the Citizens of Philadelphia - culminating in a case being made for how and why park reform will take place in Philadelphia. Please stay tuned to hear what the Parks Alliance is planning for the Fall. Thank you!
Learn More on PPA's website at www.philaparks.org
Below , read a Policy Alert from The Committee of Seventy as well as today's Editorial in the Daily News:
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: CHRISTOPHER SHERIDAN
POLICY DIRECTOR
(215) 557-3600 x104
ZACHARY STALBERG
PRESIDENT AND CEO
(215) 557-3600 x106
Policy Alert
Look Hard Before We Leap - The Committee of Seventy Urges City Council to Take a Comprehensive Approach to Improving Fairmount Park
Policy Position
Sept. 13, 2005 - Philadelphia City Council should defer action regarding a pending legislative proposal to consolidate the Fairmount Park Commission and the City Department of Recreation. While there is wide agreement that Philadelphia’s Fairmount Park system does not live up to its potential and there is significant public support for parks reform, considerable public involvement is necessary to ensure well-informed decisions are made regarding the Park’s future.
Bill 050697, introduced by Council Members Clarke and Reynolds-Brown, calls for a November 2005 ballot question on the issue of essentially abolishing the Fairmount Park Commission and transferring its responsibilities to the City Department of Recreation. Given the legal requirements and practical considerations associated with placing a Charter Amendment question on the ballot, there is no time for meaningful public participation in a debate which would result in a major restructuring of city government and affect assets most citizens consider important.
The Committee of Seventy is calling for this bill to be withdrawn by its sponsors prior to consideration by the Law and Government Committee. Given the importance of this issue, Seventy is also calling on the sponsoring Members to maintain a leading role on this issue by working with all interested parties to devise a comprehensive legislative and budgetary program to maximize the potential of our parks and recreational resources.
Background and Analysis
On Thursday, September 15, City Council will reconvene. Every legislative session presents the opportunity for Philadelphia to take one or more steps forward (or backward). As a result of bills introduced in the spring, the current session offers the potential for significant advances in government integrity and efficiency – including the creation of an independent Board of Ethics, introduction of a mandatory ethics training program for elected officials, adoption of municipal lobbyist disclosure rules, a proposal to lease the city’s “stadium boxes” currently used by elected officials as a significant new source of revenue, and additional municipal contracting reforms. There is also a piece of legislation, Bill 050697, which proposes to consolidate the Fairmount Park Commission and the Department of Recreation purportedly in the interest of reducing costs. Increasing efficiency is always a good idea, but this bill raises a number of warning flags.
First – The bill was introduced on June 16th just prior to the summer recess, and will require “fast tracking” in order to get the proposed question approved in time for the November Ballot.
Second - No public hearings or meetings have been scheduled, but there has been talk of holding hearings as soon as Council reconvenes in an attempt to meet the November deadline. Given the wide interest in the future of our park system, public hearings and meetings should be expanded, not expedited, to ensure that all relevant opinions are taken into account by City Council. All those who want to speak should be given the chance to speak.
Third – If the ballot question is approved by Council in October, there will be inadequate time for potential supporters and opponents to study the legislation, let alone conduct a meaningful civic education campaign in support of their position.
Fourth – This is a low interest election cycle and the result of presenting this proposed ballot question in November 2005 would be that the decision on a major restructuring of city government would be left to a very small and unrepresentative portion of our electorate.
Fifth – This is a proposed Charter Amendment, which means it would be very difficult, both politically and legally, to undo action approved by 2/3 of City Council and more than half of the voters – even if the long-term result is a policy disaster – better to look carefully before we leap.
While legislative decisiveness is something we would like to see a lot more of, in this case the resource in question, Fairmount Park, is the city’s crown jewel, enjoyed by virtually all Philadelphians and millions of visitors to our City each year. Few would suggest that Philadelphia parklands have been managed by the Fairmount Park Commission to achieve their full potential, but the abrupt elimination or evisceration of the Fairmount Park Commission and transfer of its responsibilities to the Recreation Department will do nothing to improve the physical condition of park resources, which is what really matters to Philadelphia residents.
The vigorous opposition now being put forth by the Philadelphia Parks Alliance and their allies confirm that adequate public consultation did not take place prior to this bill’s introduction - at least 123 community groups and 977 individuals have publicly voiced their opposition to this Bill 050697. It is worth noting that these same advocates opposing this bill have simultaneously signed on to a petition calling for significant reforms, which shows there is strong support for change, as long it’s done responsibly.
What is needed before any legislative action is taken is adoption and wide dissemination of a comprehensive plan for the long-term stewardship of Fairmount Park. In 2003, a strategic plan costing more than $600,000 was commissioned by the City and the Fairmount Park Commission. Portions of this plan were published in June 2004, but as with the 21st Century Review Forum, ostensibly a guiding document for Mayor Street’s second term, this parks reform plan remains an academic exercise, yet to receive serious policy consideration, let alone implementation.
Based on these real and practical concerns and the public’s desire to see a well-considered forward-thinking plan for Fairmount Park, we call on the sponsors of Bill 050697 to withdraw it from consideration and initiate a comprehensive effort to return our park resources to their historic status as one of the world’s finest urban park systems. Such an effort will require a significant financial commitment by the city, visionary partnerships with parks advocates, foundations and corporations, and yes, a critical assessment of the parks management structure and ideally, an adoption of best practices from around the country.
Effective implementation of proposed ethics and contracting reforms could generate savings to help pay for the necessary investments in Fairmount Park. Council should actively support efforts to make Philadelphia government more honest, transparent and efficient. On the surface government ethics is a matter of right and wrong, but for those who look deeper, it is also a matter dollars and cents – which become available for public investment and tax relief when waste and corruption are eliminated.
For Philadelphia, improving transparency, ethics oversight and government efficiency could also dramatically increase philanthropic investments in public assets such as parks and libraries, since donors would be more confident that their gifts would be effectively administered and not wasted via sweetheart deals with political supporters and family members. Think about it, would you entrust an administration tainted by corruption and subject to minimal ethical oversight with your charitable giving?
With parks, ethics and many other matters, this City Council has the option of simply accepting the status quo, satisfying itself with half measures, or working hard for comprehensive long-term solutions. Philadelphians deserve solutions.
Christopher B. Sheridan, Esq. Zack Stalberg
Policy Director President and CEO
###
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Daily News Editorial September 14, 2005
Philadelphia Daily News Posted on Wed, Sep. 14, 2005
SIGNE WILKENSON
Philadelphia Daily News Posted on Wed, Sep. 14, 2005
DEATH TO THE PARK COMMISSION
FAIRMOUNT DESERVES BETTER LEADERSHIP - HERE'S WHY AND HOW
THE FAIRMOUNT Park Commission must die - at least in its present form.
It already has withered, like other antiquated institutions that no longer function. As long as it lingers, with an artifical veneer of independence, the reforms necessary to stem Fairmount Park's decline never will happen.
When we first began our intensive study of the city's parks for our 2001 series, "Acres of Neglect," we found Fairmount Park in a pathetic state of decline, neglected by city leaders, and often tragically abused by park users. There was little political will to make change. Compared to the 65 parks administered by the commission, the 70 parks then governed by the city's Recreation Department were better funded and better run.
A large portion of Fairmount Park's sad state could be traced to that difference: Not only was there a duplication of effort and funding, there was a clear favoritism toward Recreation. No surprise there: The Recreation Department is part of city government. The Fairmount Park Commission is isolated and disconnected from City Hall.
We concluded that the best way to run the parks was the way most cities do it: through a city Department of Parks and Recreation.
Four years later, Fairmount Park does a better job of covering the basics. The park is less shabby; it's no longer a dumping ground for cars and appliances. Yet it is still miles away from operating at the peak of its potential. Even with its unique gift of 9,200 acres of land, Fairmount Park falls short on every measure of what makes a great urban park.
We are even more convinced that the Fairmount Park Commission is incapable of effecting the kind of real change in oversight the parks require.
Now there is a chance to do something about it.
Tomorrow, City Council members Darrell Clarke and Blondell Reynolds-Brown are expected to introduce a resolution to amend the city charter to transform the governance of Fairmount Park.
The amendment - originally scheduled to appear on the November ballot but since changed to appear in May - would create a city Department of Parks and Recreation to take over the day-to-day operations of all city parks. It also would remake the commission into a 12-member advisory board appointed by the mayor to consider questions of policy, including the disposition of land.
While we disagree with some of the details (addressed later in this series), we support the Clarke and Reynolds-Brown effort to restructure the parks. We urge City Council to do the same.
The Philadelphia Parks Alliance, which once clamored for change, now has pivoted in the other direction, recruiting 123 other organizations to endorse a resolution that would slam the brakes on the idea.
Too many others just don't care that much. As long as a tree doesn't fall on their heads, slightly more than half our citizens, according to a survey done recently, are content with the way things are run now.
But things can be different, and they must. We'll spend the next few days telling you why and how.
The membership of the commission was reconstituted somewhat three years ago after an unprecedented focus on - and attempt to work within - its weird selection process: While six members of the commission serve by virtue of their jobs in the city, 10 are elected at-large by the Common Pleas Court Board of Judges. When six of those 10 commissioners were new in May, 2002, we dared hope a new era had begun.
Unfortunately, greater transparency in the process and responsiveness to the community by the judges turned out to be a onetime wonder.
And while the commission has accomplished a few things since then, it usually has done so only after much prodding. Most significantly, it has done little to address the major themes of a $600,000 strategic plan completed more than a year ago - up to and including working through the last details for receiving all the supporting material from consultant Leon Younger and PROS of Indianapolis.
(One possible reason: The strategic plan found precious little positive about the commission: It determined that the commission is lacking in vision and consistency, with a "culture that has consumed itself and is largely introspective." It goes on: "The commission operates in a manner that appears to be for self-preservation versus a focus on the park and open space needs of the City... ")
The other major task the commission set for itself also went bust: its search for a dynamic executive director who would be a "change agent." After two years, Fairmount Park has had two interim directors and now has given up looking for change. Mark Focht, the capable former head of the Natural Lands Restoration and Environmental Education Program, was named executive director until the end of Mayor Street's term in 2008.
Fairmount Park hasn't been integrated into our city's sophisticated focus on tourism. Its value hasn't been fully recognized as Philadelphia works to transform its neighborhoods.
Its budget tells the tale: Thirty years ago, the park's budget was $11 million. By 2001, it had crept up to $13 million, a serious decline of real dollars. After getting a raise in 2004, its budget is back to $13 million, and is clearly off the radar of city leaders' "must do" list.
The commission must take major responsibility for this decline. It has failed to make its case to City Hall. It is more reminiscent of a lousy borough council for a rundown old town than a forceful advocate for its vision of the park.
Maybe that's because it has no shared vision of the park. Its meetings continue to feature trivia and inanities. Behind the scenes, the demoralized park staff is confirmed in its sense of victimhood.
Commission members complain about insufficient funds, but are reluctant to take responsibility for generating revenue. Concession agreements aren't equitable and full compliance isn't enforced. Its four-year-old fund-raising arm, the Fairmount Park Conservancy, has raised $9 million, much from the "low-hanging fruit" of foundation grants. The best city parks generate 35 to 40 percent of their operating expenses. Fairmount Park generates 10 percent.
As it is, the commission offers a protective layer shielding the mayor and City Council from being held accountable for the parks.
The strategic plan drew a road map to get Fairmount Park the attention and the money to assure its rightful place as a major asset of the city. Yet instead of following the roadmap, the park commission is content to shuffle around in circles.
The good news: Quite soon, you may be able to have a hands-on opportunity to change this - by pushing a button on the voting machine.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Daily News Posted on Wed, Sep. 14, 2005
The Geese and Pig Report: How the parks are faring
HOW DO YOU measure the general state of health of a system as big as 9,200 acres? In 2001, the Daily News editorial board spent months touring the city's parks. What emerged during that series were a few "hotspots" - places judged good barometers for measuring how well the parks are doing. Here's what we found when we recently revisited some hotspots.
Tacony Creek car graveyard
Then: The most dramatic and heartbreaking testament to Fairmount Park's decline came from the abandoned and rusted cars lying in the creekbeds of Tacony Park.
Now: The paths to the creek are barred not only by guard rails but by 6-foot high grasses that were planted as part of a meadow-creation project. No cars. No access to creek, either.
Belmont Plateau,
Monday morning
Then: An overrun dump, with overflowing trashcans. Beer bottles and other debris strew the grounds from the weekend. Lame excuses for why it takes so long to get things cleaned up.
Now: The nonprofit Ready, Willing and Able crews were out in the morning, and by 11 a.m. the trash cans were empty.
Restrooms
Then: A shocking scarcity of open, functioning restrooms in the park.
Now: A limited number are open and monitored. In a recent visit, we found Pennypack Park's were relatively clean, though unlit, and graffiti marred one door.
Swimming holes
Then: The shortage of park rangers meant that the creeks are rarely monitored for illegal swimmers, and a shortage of signs didn't help.
Now: The number of park rangers hasn't changed. Neither have the boys of summer, many of whom we found splashing and swimming, despite the risks.
General aesthetics
You can tell a lot about the health of a park system just by driving around and observing. Is it overgrown and shabby, or well-tended and inviting? These days, the park is less shabby than it was, and in many places greatly improved. One reason: the creation of meadows that have replaced lawns in 50 of the park's 9,200 acres. These high grass meadows serve as effective barriers, keeping geese from fouling the banks of the Schuylkill, and (human) pigs from using the park as a dumping ground. Downside: They also limit access for all.
The Editorial Board
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Philadephia Daily News Posted on Wed, Sep. 14, 2005
Meet the Commission
E. Harris Baum: A practicing attorney in the city for more than 40 years. He is married to Administrative Judge Myrna Field, who serves on the board of judges that elects the commissioners. (When initially interviewed in 2001, she said she saw no reason to abstain from voting for her husband.) He's considered to be committed to the park. His attendance record (50 percent) says otherwise.
GRADE: 2.5 TREES
John Binswanger: One of the biggest movers and shakers on the commission, he presides over a commercial real estate empire that carries his name. He is considered dedicated to the park, but his provenance dates to the time that a major qualification for being a commissioner was the ability to write a check. Best known for being the driving force behind the Fairmount Park Conservancy, the commission's fund-raising arm. Also, being the father-in-law of the owner of Fairmount Management Inc., the company that held exclusive vending rights for the park until recently. (The city bought them out of their contract for $1.2 million). Attendance: 90 percent.
GRADE: 3 TREES
Thomas Carter: A friend of Gov. Rendell. Has attended eight out of 10 meetings since his appointment. Has so far not bothered to bring his vocal cords to any of them. He also didn't respond to our multiple requests for a resume.
GRADE: DEAD WOOD
Leon Tucker: Tucker was recently elected judge. He has attended nine out of 10 meetings, but has not been much of presence.
GRADE: 1.5 TREES
Robert N.C. Nix III: A commissioner since 1986; elected chairman in 2001. Most who cite his commission's accomplishments over the last few years - leasing Memorial Hall to the Please Touch Museum, for example - also cite the calcified system and the glacial pace the commission used in moving on them. He lacks not only a coherent vision for the park, but the inclination to push for change. His juice doesn't seem to have much impact on the current mayor.
GRADE: 2.5 TREES
Connie Little: The mayor's appointee to the commission. She hasn't been there long enough to grade, but has been with the mayor for centuries.
NO GRADE
Mary Mason: She is an appointee of City Council President Anna Verna. We'll risk being pummeled on her radio show and call her performance as commissioner disruptive, rude, and divisive. And that's not just us talking. Attendance: 90 percent.
GRADE: 1 TREE
Marcia Makadon: Another of the old-guard commissioners who served as the representative of the mayor until June, when she was elected by the Board of Judges. Her attendance as ex-officio is 80 percent. Makadon has shown signs lately of having an independent pulse, but she has mostly been a shadowy presence.
GRADE: 2 TREES
Phil Price: The parks are in his DNA, literally. His great-great-grandfather was a Fairmount Park commissioner and helped established the park. Price gets marks for standing up to his fellow commissioners, and for having purer intentions than most for pushing for change. Attendance: 90 percent.
GRADE: 4 TREES
Rosanne Pauciello: A State Sen. Vince Fumo aide, Pauciello has been a commissioner since 1987. She has over the last few years become more vocal at meetings. Attendance: 70 percent. Known for usually siding with Mason.
GRADE: 2 TREES
Doris Smith: If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, what is it doing there? Smith was on the endorsed roster of commissioners from the Friends of the Parks groups. Her performance - or rather, lack of one - is a disappointment. She did not respond to our repeated requests for a resume. Attendance: 80 percent.
GRADE: DEAD WOODDebra Wolf-Goldstein: Probably the most traditionally qualified member of the commission, she has a background in conservation and law, and serves as vice president. Considered smart, but cautious. Aligned with Nix.
GRADE: 3.5 TREES
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Daily News Posted on Wed, Sep. 14, 2005
A city park in name only
WHEN IS A PARK not a park?
When it's in Philadelphia.
The heart of the issue is the division between the 62 parks now managed by Fairmount Park and the 79 managed by the city's Recreation Department. The division is real on paper, but how real is it in reality... and why should park users care?
Recreation Department parks include rec centers, swimming pools, and ball fields. Those managed by Fairmount are mainly, but not exclusively, "passive" recreation that have trails and large open spaces. Fairmount Park includes seven watershed parks, large regional parks, much of them natural land.
The Fairmount Park Commission and these watershed parks, like Pennypack and Tacony, were created in 1867 to preserve and protect open space and ensure the quality of the water supply.
Those arguing for the status quo say that the current structure, and the commission, is the only way to keep preserving and protecting these lands.
But that's not true. For one thing, there are federal regulations now in place that help do the job. For another, the commission has made recent decisions on disposing of park land - like ceding part of Burlhome Park to the Fox Chase Cancer Center - absent any evident criteria. The point is, there are alternative structures that could focus on preservation better than the commission does. The time to create one is now.
The recently completed strategic plan for Fairmount Park, which also calls for restructuring the parks, points out: "The original mission to preserve and protect open space and ensure the quality of the water supply has been achieved." It also says "the separation of parks and recreation in Philadelphia has created confusion of roles and responsibilities, dilution of resources, and inefficiencies... "
Combined, the two divisions comprise a large and complex park system with an obsolete division that has prevented anyone from viewing it - and improving on it - as a single system.
There's one more big difference that is worth noting: The Recreation Department, which manages 1,464 acres, gets $34 million from the city. The 9,200-acre Fairmount Park, which is accountable to no one, gets $13 million.
The Editorial Board
/*Your email ID. <diaEmailID='37329406' thread=6370/>--*/