Laserfiche WebLink
The Committee discussed incorporating the Audubon International accreditation, which they <br />determined is not off the table. <br />Jennifer Betz, 511 S. St. Joseph St., wanted to express support for Council Woman Broden and <br />Council Woman White's suggestion about continuing the Special Advisory Committee. We're <br />here because there was a betrayal of public trust and we were having to hold officials <br />accountable who weren't elected, and that proved very difficult. I know we're in a different <br />place now, but I worry about the fact that it will take some time to build the public trust back, <br />and I think the Special Advisory Committee has been a wonderful foundation, and it would <br />rebuild public trust to have those recommendations go into the body that has been dealing with <br />all of this in the first place. Remember that originally when Elbel for Everyone formed, our <br />original requests were ecological integrity and public access. We've gone back into the <br />discussion about lease and sale this evening, but I want to remind you that parks aren't <br />necessarily about making money, that's not what parks are for. They are there for the common <br />good, for the good of our city. <br />Chris Cobb, 215 E. Pokagon St., Speaking to the matter of the structure of Recommendation Six <br />(6) and how oversight is going to be continued, it seems that for the progress report update <br />option to function well, it depends greatly upon what kind of standing committee structures are <br />put into place. I find it unsettling that we would move away from the special advisory prior to <br />the formation of the more permanent standing committees, and with merely a recommendation <br />that the formation of the standing committees be considered. It sounds like the Park Board is <br />inclined to act upon this, but it still seems like there is a gap in the process. It would facilitate <br />that transition for this advisory committee to continue that function until such time as a <br />permanent rather than ad hoc set of advisory structures are established. I am conscious that <br />nothing in the recommendations has engaged deeply with the matter of the educational value of <br />Elbel. I am concerned that that value would be lost in the process. <br />Catherine Osborne, 517 River Ave., wanted to thank everyone for their work so far, and echo the <br />others by asking the committee not to lose focus. This process was not driven by the Parks <br />Board, it was driven by Community Investment. Remember that we are talking about disbanding <br />the Special Advisory Committee now, and sending this extremely sensitive matter back into a <br />process that didn't serve it so well the first time around. It seems like having an unofficial but <br />morally weighty recommendation from the Special Advisory Committee at the end of the <br />summer once the data has been gathered. <br />Jerry Niezgodski, 1113 N. Elliot, asked if the document Mr. Perri presented would be online, and <br />Mr. Perri said that it would be added to the Elbel Dropbox. As a golfer, I want to see Elbel <br />remain a golf course. It is a great ecological resource besides being just a golf course, though. <br />There was a lot of time for years where the 18th green had water encroaching on it. For years, we <br />saw development adjacent to the golf course, and the water level went down. Now it looks more <br />like a marsh than a lake. If housing is built where the tree farm is now, you can say goodbye to <br />the lake. If you are interested in preserving that land, you better keep your eye on the proposal to <br />sell the tree farm. <br />11 <br />