The Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board is likely to look quite different after city elections on Nov. 3. All nine seats are up for grabs. Two current commissioners are not running for reelection. The remaining seven seeking another four-year term face some of the most competitive races in years.
In its waning days in office, the current board's priority should be arranging a respectful handoff to the newly elected board in January. Instead, some commissioners are setting up a sneaky power grab of a sort all too familiar to longtime Park Board observers.
On Nov. 4, a mere 24 hours after voters go to the polls, the current board will vote on whether to extend current Park Superintendent Jon Gurban's contract another year. That's a critical leadership decision the current board should not swipe from the new one.
Current Vice President Mary Merrill Anderson and former President Bob Fine, who are leading the contract extension charge, pitch this as looking out for the park system and the new board. The new commissioners will need time to get up to speed, they say. And the park system needs stable leadership to face the challenges ahead, including a national park management convention planned here next year.
| Movie Finder |
But if the new board needs time, it can extend Gurban's contract come January. An extension now serves Gurban's interest while usurping the authority of the new board. The superintendent's contract expires June 30. The yearlong extension would begin then, meaning he'd ultimately be in office for the next 18 months. That's 38 percent of the term the new board will serve with a leader they may or may not like.
The new board could buy out Gurban's extended contract and hire a new superintendent of its choice. But doing so would be costly. He'd get half a year's pay -- $70,000 -- plus benefits. Commissioner Scott Vreeland estimated total buyout costs at around $100,000.
That kind of money could be put to good use spiffing up neighborhood parks or buying sports equipment for the thousands of young athletes in recreation programs.
And what is the risk of waiting two months until the new board can weigh the contract? This week, Merrill Anderson said she didn't know if Gurban had other job offers or if he'd decline to stay on longer if needed if his contract weren't extended right now. On Wednesday, Gurban wouldn't respond to an editorial writer's questions about this. Current commissioners should press for answers before Nov. 4, and Gurban had better be more forthcoming with his bosses about this basic information. Voting on the issue without it is just plain irresponsible.