MOUNTAIN PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MERGER PROPOSALS

March/April 1999

Included here are a variety of concerns regarding the latest proposals about merging Boulder City Mountain Parks and Open Space.

These ideas and questions come from people concerned about preserving the long, successful tradition of Boulder Mountain Parks’ ecological stewardship and respect for reasonable public access. The people involved include both past and current Parks and Open Space board members, plus other interested people.

The concerns and discussions were precipitated by city manager Ron Secrist's memo of 3 March '99 to the city council, in which he outlined two options, both of which would involve reassigning Jim Crain and Ann Wichmann to different positions elsewhere in the city. In very simple form the two options are as follows:

OPTION 1 would put Mountain Parks into the Open Space/Real Estate Dept.

OPTION 1A would create a new department into which both depts. would be merged. This option would separate the Real Estate Dept. from the new department.

Because we have had serious problems in the following areas, the new leader needs the following qualifications:

A A successful record working with his or her staff.

B. A successful record working with the public.

C. A thorough understanding of, and a successful record in, ecological stewardship and recreation issues.

There are so many "now or never" acquisitions to be made for Mountain Parks, Open Space, and the rest of the city, that it is unwise to jeopardize these essential needs any longer. It is unrealistic to ask one person to manage the Real Estate Department, the Open Space Deptartment, and if merged, Mountain Parks too. The talents of the Real Estate Department and its director are needed full time on acquisitions for Open Space, Mountain Parks, and the rest of the city.

Open space, for example, needs to progress beyond the confrontational "recreation vs. preservation" approach that continues to cause severe problems. Trying to close the popular Bobolink Trail and trying to eliminate dogs on Open Space are two examples of this.

Mountain Parks understands that both recreation and preservation can be done well. This philosophy was clearly demonstrated during the recent planning forums. It has also been demonstrated by many years of successful rock climbing closures during raptor nesting season. Several raptor species that are in decline elsewhere are multiplying in the Mountain parks, and rock climbers can still use the area much of the year.

For more than 100 years Mountain Parks has successfully protected the ecological treasures of Boulder's mountain backdrop while providing many meaningful recreation opportunities. Mountain Parks has also provided numerous educational programs like the extraordinarily popular Junior Ranger program.

These successes must be preserved in the proposed new department. In fact, THE LONG AND SUCCESSFUL RECORD OF BOULDER'S MOUNTAIN PARKS SHOULD BE THE MODEL FOR THE PROPOSED NEW DEPARTMENT.

Because Open Space is so large compared with Mountain Parks, and because Mountain Parks has so much to offer that could easily be lost, it is necessary for current or past park Board members to have equal representation with Open Space on the first board of the new department. Participation on a "transition team" is not adequate.

The existing 5-member Open Space board has always been too small for adequately diverse discussions. Unfortunately, it would require a charter change and public vote to increase the Open Space board to 7 members, but perhaps both boards could work jointly for the first few years. Alternatively, perhaps two current Open Space and two current Parks Board members plus one additional new appointee could make up the first new board. If it becomes necessary for other reasons to modify the Open Space charter with a public vote, increasing the Open Space board to 7 members should be included.

Equal representation of both Mountain Parks and Open Space is essential for the proposed new department to be successful.

To help respect the history of both programs that would make up the new department, the new department might be named The Department of Mountain Parks and Open Space, or vice versa. The order is not important.

For example, the city attorney has clearly stated that Open Space canNOT manage the Chautauqua area or Flagstaff Mountain. Buckingham Park, Buckingham Campground, and Boulder Reservoir would also be problems under the Open Space charter.

The 8 Open Space charter purposes are wisely NOT prioritized. They are all equally important. Unfortunately, environmental education and historic preservation were not included, and passive recreation remains a difficult concept to define. Therefore, a mission statement is needed for the new department. It should draw from mission statements of both Mountain Parks and Open space, and it should complement the Open Space charter.

Because the city already realizes substantial savings from vacant positions in both department, and because the staffs are operating well at these level, it is unclear what additional savings will be accomplished by the proposed merger. Is this really about getting more money for the city general fund by reducing the Mountain Parks budget and replacing it with money from the Open Space department? Any additional compelling purposes of the proposed merger also need to be carefully explained in order to be a successful part of the proposed new department.

There is much to be lost if concerns about the proposed new department are not adequately addressed. There is also much to be gained if the proposed new department avoids repeating past problems and, instead, builds on past successes. More than 100 years of Mountain Parks' successful care of the Boulder Mountain backdrop provide an excellent example as this community considers how to care for these lands in the future.

These ideas are offered to help people understand and respond to the current proposal for merging Mountain Parks and Open Space. Appropriate protection of our valuable natural heritage and appropriate public access to our open lands will be significantly affected by how, or if, this merger is done.

There will be a City Council study session about this issue on Tuesday April 27^th, starting at 6.00 PM in the city council chambers. There will be 1-1/2 hours of public comment. The City Council is encouraging written comments be sent to them before the meeting.

The City Council can be reached at: Fax: 303-441-4478

The Parks Board can be reached at: Fax: 303-413-7201

Tel: 303-413-7205

Individual city council members and park board or Open Space Board members can be reached directly by looking up the appropriate fax, phone, or e-mail addresses on the Boulder Community Network website.