This “project” began as one of those e-mails that one sends after a couple of cocktails or in the middle of a troubled, sleepless night. It just nags at me that if there were such thing as “the record” it should be accurate. Blogs probably won’t serve history as well as, say stone tablets, but maybe the legitimate print press will find this among the e-detritus so that scholars and the just plain curious will have some insight into the civic exercise that brought the Upper Midwest Target Field.

E-mail, From: Markoyaas@aol.com To: Mark@Neerland.Oyaas.com

Dear Mark, you and Chuck Neerland have a long history with the great civic journey that resulted in the marvelous Target Field. Lots of folks are taking justifiable bows these days but there seems to be a glaring, even embarrassing omission in the limelight - Bruce Lambrecht. Bruce’s inspired concept for a ballpark was a critical component in forming a complicated partnership between the Twins and the public that resulted in the enabling legislation and ultimately the ballpark. You have, first hand, working knowledge of the details that led to the meltdown, legal entanglements and animosity which is obviously still alive today among the parties involved in acquiring the land. I will tell you that there were plenty of missteps that led to “stillborn” negotiations and the ensuing legal and public relation nightmares. Somewhere along that journey a clever entrepreneur with a vision bigger than a parking lot became besmirched as “Changeable Bruce” and “the Greedy Landowner” Ultimately the “system” which is designed to remedy such disputes worked its magic and the land was acquired. None of those details need to be rehashed as we celebrate this monumental public gathering place. But just as we provide ode to Jerry Bell’s remarkable perseverance and Mike Opat’s political courage, so too should Lambrecht’s original vision for an urban ballpark that took advantage of existing infrastructure and a neighborhood already built for entertainment. The Rapid Park solution was as important as the public financing plan and the Twins substantial contribution in telling the story to the Legislature and the general public in 2006. Lambrecht’s wildest ballpark dreams is now reality but are in jeopardy of being lost to history.

When you get up in the morning take a few minutes out of the day and write down the pieces that you think are missing. Share it with Aron Kahn, the sage, once a trusted scribe now capable P.R. Counselor. Maybe he can find a home for the idea in the real press. (I did, he did and Jon Tevlin the Star Tribune’s columnist found his way to tell the story much better than I did….see below. There is a link to Jon’s piece at the end.

Draft R2

I have been watching the vibrant retelling of the history behind Target Field with considerable interest. The din created by the self-congratulatory back-slapping is deafening. Unfortunately, the cacophony has so far drowned out a critical piece of the civic puzzle that took its shape as Target Field. That, of course, is the role played by Bruce Lambrecht, the guy whose dream for what could be on fallow land on the edge of downtown provided the missing link in the quest to build a new baseball park for the Twins.

Most of the lack of recognition can be attributed as a consequence of an ugly dispute in the process of acquiring the land, but those circumstances should not overshadow the importance of the possibility, now a reality, that Bruce presented to the community way back in 2000. My business partner Charles Neerland and I joined the ballpark crusade formally in 1997 at the request of then-Mayor Sharon Sayles Belton and Hennepin County Commissioner Peter McLaughlin. They both knew that we had tested some ideas for a simpler ballpark with the Twins in the years prior, and Chuck and I had worked for the City as part of a team that successfully secured a State-sponsored plan for expanding the Convention Center.

We more or less waited out 1998 as the Twins danced the referendum dance with the City of St. Paul and resurfaced with the help of several business leaders, most notably Jim Campbell of Wells Fargo and John Schueler, then publisher of the Star Tribune. (Pressure from the troops at the Strib forced John to step down, formally, but another John, Murphy from U.S. Bank, stepped up.) Supported by Hennepin County’s finance guy Jim Ufer and Jim Bellus, then at Piper Jaffray, we tested out plans that would put some amount of private investment into the ballpark. Looking at the problem as a puzzle, we concluded that the project needed three legs to stand: 1) a financing plan that included private money (including the Twins owners) which brings private sector construction discipline, 2) a public partner with capacity to issue debt for a public contribution, and 3) a site that would provide obvious benefit to a willing neighborhood. The buzzwords were compact, transit-oriented, neighborhood ballpark.

These ideas gained momentum with the County, led by Mike Opat and Mark Stenglein, who were both part of our regular meetings. During the same period of time Bruce Lambrecht began to put serious work into testing an idea he had to construct a baseball park between the Fifth and Seventh Street bridges on land he and his business partner controlled that was generating income as a surface parking lot. Bruce brought the idea forward through Stenglein who in turn brought it to New Ballpark, Inc., our group’s working title, and City leaders.

By June of 2000 we had a couple of models for public/private financing and several potential sites in Minneapolis. City leaders, even though they were not part of the financing plans, insisted we “vet” ideas with a citizens committee. The concept of compact/transit-oriented/serving a neighborhood proved inspirational with that committee and when Lambrecht presented his vision for the Rapid Park site, that inspiration felt very real.

In 2004 the City, County and Land Partners (Bruce’s group) entered into an agreement in principle and the “Rapid Park” site was adopted as the official submission for a ballpark sweepstakes initiated by Governor Pawlenty.

There were still several hurdles to overcome. The architects under contract to the Twins (Ellerbe, then CD FM2) had both advised that the Rapid Park site was too small or at a minimum needed considerable expensive altering to become workable. This fact, which obviously wasn’t the case served detractors very well for the remainder of the haul. The Twins’ political consultants cautioned that the Legislature would be reluctant to approve a County as the public partner; especially Hennepin which is often seen as an evil empire out of control. St. Paul boosters were still insisting their city could get this deal done and deserved it because their leaders were willing to go out on the political limb.

There can be little doubt that it was the concept first forwarded and championed by Bruce Lambrecht that kept churning the momentum. The transit, Hiawatha LRT and Northstar, were becoming reality, the existing parking and willing business neighbors already were. By 2005 the Twins leaders were fully on board and the bill passed in 2006. For several years running there were authentic grass roots efforts, some ad hoc and one effectively coordinated by the Minneapolis Downtown Council and Chamber of Commerce, which helped place public pressure on the Legislature. Almost all of the graphics used in those endeavors were from Bruce’s original “Twinsville” presentations.

Success has many parents. The outcome certainly is splendid enough that kudos and credits can be widely shared. It will be a shame that borders on tragic if Bruce Lambrecht is not among those recognized for the wonderful community accomplishment that is Target Field.

Jon Tevlin’s piece:

http://www.startribune.com/local/90710044.html?page=1&c=y
submitted on the record: MJO

It is time again for municipal elections in Minneapolis and, as is their wont, well meaning reformers are stepping up with bold ideas for charter change. Strong Mayor this, city manager that…yawn. The truth is that inspired elected officials and talented dedicated staff have and can again do great things in our great City. History is full of examples of mayors successfully shepherding creative initiatives like the original Nicollet mall or Mayor Al Hofstede’s family housing policy. Working with common purpose Mayor Don Fraser and Council President Alice Rainville brought Minnesota back into the upper echelons as a convention destination. More recently Mayor Rt Rybak was able to make good on a daring campaign promise and merge the City’s planning and development functions. While the jury is still out on the actual effect of this merger there is no question it was a sea change in administrative function. One suggestion for change stands out as seriously flawed and will hopefully be nipped in the bud during the vigorous public debate that election season offers; decommissioning the elected Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board.

Scrapping an elected Park and Recreation Board is an ill-conceived, risky idea that if realized would almost certainly result in a diminishing of our cherished quality of life. Minneapolis lives its parks. Since its inception elected leaders have established and protected an urban system of parks and open space rivaled (as a system) by no other in the nation. The Park Board has successfully balanced the maintenance of parks and open space with the recreational and neighborhood needs of residents through thriving community centers that offer a vast array of popular programming from infants to seniors.

The legacy and promise of this marvelous resource requires stewardship protected from the cyclic distractions that dominate City Councils. In times of economic catastrophe it would be too easy to turn to the parks as cash assets or kids sports as unnecessary luxuries. Park Commissioners during the Great Depression did not lose sight of their mission, nor is it likely that their counterparts today will either.

An elected park board is not by definition a barrier to correcting inefficiencies. The debate regarding anachronisms like a separate police force can be conducted should our elected officials choose to engage their counterparts in meaningful discussion. Rather than spend time worrying about societal issues that require nation wide lifestyle change like trans fat consumption, bottled water and circus animals, I would encourage our elected council members to concentrate on municipal priorities in meaningful and persistent ways.

Finally it must be conceded that our political infra structure has failed to produce Park Commissioners with the backgrounds and commitment to the future found at the first half of the Board’s existence. However I would point out that it is this same one party process dominated by the interest groups de Jour that gives us our Mayor and Council Members. Having this group appoint our Park Stewards would only dilute their effectiveness.

The recent special report of Time magazine  featured Bill Gates’s essay on creative capitalism. It’s worth reading, rolling out in short, readable paragraphs, with specific examples  throughout history,and ending with a mild exhortation to get on board with his mission to help solve poverty and hunger through market incentives. Mr. Gates writes about a late-night drinking session with Bono–Bono the singer–and watching Bono call CEOS  around the world to enlist them in a program to divert a share of profits for good causes. We all should have such fun.

 I read the essay with an eye to finding some fatuousness or another that surely a rich man out of touch with economic reality would concoct. Don’t we all sort of hope the rich get egg on their faces when they choose to lecture the rest of us? Frankly, I didn’t find much to scoff at or quibble with. Oh, one could be pissy and say the very phrase “creative capitalism” is a redundancy. Isn’t creativity the point of capitalism? And on a more substantive point, one could make the case that Milton Friedman’s famous insistence that corporations existed solely for the purpose of increasing shareholder value does not necessarily exclude serving other constituencies or even emphasizing philanthropy or cause-related marketing. I’ve always believed that Friedman was just waiting for someone to point that out–it isn’t either/or, it’s both. Otherwise the particular market goes haywire and the investors get screwed. Hedge fund boyos who justified their greed on Friedman’s opinion shouldn’t be cited with what’s wrong with capitalism but what’s wrong with  pampered jerks with no social  or societal sense.

In a former life, I dared say that to the managers of Northwest Bancorporation, and they all readily agreed, and generated profits and invested in preserving the viability of the marketplace without thinking there was any inconsistency. This was back in the ’70s. Life seemed simpler then.

But Mr. Gates deserves credit for being passionate, thoughtful and lucid.

And, finally, here’s my own exhortation. Did Mr. Obama or Mr. McCain.or their handlers read the article and if so what did they think? The first presidential candidate to call for a summit on creative capitalism will win the election. The electorate’s raw nerve is a sense, I believe, that the system doesn’t work anymore, and the sooner its government calls for a discussion on the nature of and opportunities for capitalism the sooner the political balm will be applied.

We’ll see. Meanwhile, God bless the rich who don’t just fall back on self-indulgence and platitudes. We don’t need another fatuous book on corporate ethics; we need creative economic thinking. Put the issues on a big table and let’s start talking

Submitted with an eye on making a buck here or there,

C.N.

Ideas count, don’t they? In politics especially, I keep trying to convince myself. But I don’t hear any ideas from presidential or Minnesota senate candidates. Just warmed over stuff that sort of sounds good no matter where on the political spectrum you find yourself Listen to Al Franken: Norm Coleman has to be held accountable for supporting George Bush. Are you suggesting he should have supported Al Gore? And what about a single payer health care system, Al …or Norm…or anyone. We’re all for universal health care, and so we ‘ve covered that subject,  and now let’s move on to a deep, resounding cry for change. What?

We’re sailing on the global economy ship. No one seems to deny it. And yet the Democrat candidates for president couldn’t wait to shred NAFTA, especially in Ohio and Pennsylvania. What are we for in the new flat world? Here’s an idea: free foreign language training for all citizens. Minneapolis could do its own version and truly make itself an international city. I’m dreaming, I know.

We shouldn’t stand for cliches and soaring rhetoric. These language modes make us feel good, but they’re like cotton candy: no nutrition and bad for one’s teeth. I’m not asking for program details on some esoteric tax policies, although a candidate could tell us to go to his/her web page for such. I’m asking for ideas, strong views on life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness The Peace Corps wasn’t an idea exactly. It was a means to carry out an idea that the United States had a mission to give time and talent and goodwill to other citizens of the world who had gotten short-shrift.

The fairly strange man who is the president of France has ideas. One is that Mediterranean bordering nations have a common set of interests, interests that might transcend their religious, cultural and ethnic differences.

So let’s set up confederation of such countries loosely based on the European Common Union, he suggested, both during  his campaign and, most wonderfully, after his election. A Club Med kind of NAFTA. Don’t like that idea? Why? Let’s hear your idea.

I know why ideas are in short supply in big election campaigns and why glorious emotional obfuscations  fill the political store house. It’s because the experts tell the candidates that they will lose the election if they come up with an idea. So the candidates talk as if they have ideas, but what they really have is code words.

I don’t believe the experts. I think most voters would welcome candidates who have new ideas, probably even vote for them because they have ideas. Let’s listen to all the candidates to see if any of them agree with the idea of having ideas. The ideas don’t need to be perfect, not even have parts or sections or tax or environmental impact statements. Just something to inspire us to think a little bit.

Posted as a plea (for ideas)

CN

From time to time I take a peek at Minn Post, another understaffed, underfunded, online journal just to see what those louts have lifted from this blog or our newsletter. There was a very nice overview of the 2010 Partners effort to encourage collaboration among the many stakeholders developing in the ballpark/transit neighborhood on the west side of downtown Minneapolis. The piece written by the always thoughtful Steve Berg can be viewed by following the link at the bottom of this post. Anyway I was “feeling it” as we big time bloggers say so I thought I would follow up with what I thought was a nice comment by some thoughtful Minn Post reader. Darned if she didn’t go “Google” on my ass and decide that she needed to let the vast reading public know that I am, God forbid, a lobbyist who has been an advocate for a new ballpark, even worse! That’s fine but then gentle commenter decides to take a whack at my pal Leer who has done nothing but push the mighty concept of collaboration for two years as an admittedly enlightened by self interest volunteer. Little does she know that we buy e-ink by the barrel around here so for your amusement is my follow up to “being outed”.

“Meet?” I would have to classify that as quite the speed date. If the inference was a lack of disclosure some how diminished the credibility of my post, let me disclose away. I have been directly involved as an advocate for a compact transit oriented ballpark since the mid 1990’s. This stems in part from my love of baseball, the belief that a major league baseball team is an asset to the entire region and that building a better place to see and play the game (as well as operate the team) would benefit fans and the community for generations. Note, neither my firm, Neerland & Oyaas, Inc., nor the non profit advocacy organization, New Ballpark Inc. (NBI) that my partner and I founded with several real live civic leaders have ever received a dime from the Twins or the team’s owners. I publish an almost bi-weekly newsletter, Neerland & Oyaas Online which has called to task public and private leaders who haven’t done what we perceive to be in the public’s best interest as this project has rolled out.

Through NBI I have played a role in forming two important citizen involvement committees. The first C-17 was charged by the City in 2000 to look at the economic social benefits of an urban ballpark. The Design Advisory Group (DAG 360) was convened, in part thanks to my advocacy, to stake out design principals to guide area developers, including the Ballpark Authority and the team around a standard that this was to be “more than a ballpark”. Since DAG 360 issued its report at the end of 2005 I have been working with colleagues including my friend Chuck Leer (who chaired the DAG 360 as a volunteer) to promote the concept of all of the area stakeholders working under a common umbrella to implement the driving principles behind the DAG 360 report. For more than a year I have funded without reimbursement the various communications and meeting materials to keep stakeholders interested during the protracted land fight which threatened to derail any such cooperation.

As a sometimes paid, always passionate, promoter of the ballpark I am driven by the belief that great cities are in significant ways defined by their gathering places. We promised a better ballpark that would keep our team here. The Twins, Ballpark Authority and the design team are delivering in spades. I will not waver from pursuing the second half of that promise that this project would result in a vibrant neighborhood; a place that will attract and retain residents, workers and visitors for years to come.

Beyond that I am a lifelong Minneapolis resident as is my lovely and talented wife. Our darling boys have followed my journey through the Minneapolis Public Schools. I still consider myself Catholic although not always getting the vibe directly from Rome. I am a Libra with eclectic musical tastes who enjoys sunny fall days. Whew, now maybe we can say “we’ve met”.

Link to Berg’s commentary: http://www.minnpost.com/steveberg/2008/04/22/1587/ballpark_wont_succeed_as_an_isolated_gem

Submitted with a bit of “take that” in my voice

MJO

The University of Minnesota announced this morning a tremendous, stupendous, awe inspiring $65 M gift from the Minnesota Masonic Charities to the hospital’s Cancer Center. A more complete story can be found on the Star Tribune’s web page,  www.startribune.com/lifestyle/health/17460244.html. Far be it from us to actually check a fact but if memory and some direct experience serves, the Masonic Charities derives its funding from a few main sources, notably personal philanthropy and revenue generating activities including, gasp, circuses! We want to thank those who have given so generously over the years to this magnificent benevolent organization. In addition we want to recognize the elephants who have provided so much joy to thousands of Minnesota children merely by standing on brightly colored boxes, walking in parades trunk to tail and carrying gleeful 45lb-ers upon their multi-ton frames as features of the Shrine Circuses.

Posted with gratitude on behalf of the thousands of cancer survivors, their families and their caregivers all of whom will benefit from this grant.

MJO

Well look whats back after darn near a month of Sundays, our almost daily Blog!
Regular readers of our newsletter will remember our recent laudatory look at the Regional Chamber’s media forum and our amazement at the credentials of the moderator Campbell Mithun’s John Rash. At the time we described Mr. Rash as indefatigable given his amazing credentials and work schedule. We now upgrade him to “Super-indefatigable” having just learned that he has been named as an Editorial Writer on the Star Tribune’s Editorial Board. Mr. Rash had been a contributing columnist on a monthly basis in the business section and will
now join the board the equivalent of two days a week.
Going forward John’s primary role at Campbell Mithun will be further focused on creating content examining and explaining the cultural and
commercial factors defining the dynamics of media. Mr. Rash’s analysis will no doubt be of great benefit to the agency’s clients. He will continue the many facets of his trademark “Everything Talks” – a website (rashreport.com),WCCO am radio show and podcast, weekly Advertising Age column and other published pieces including the oft cited “Rash Report Fall TV Season Preview”.
Back at the main ranch Mr. Rash’s new title will be Director of Media Analysis. He will continue to provide insights and collaborate with the media teams and Campbell Mithun clients.

We have been sharp critics of the Avista folks and their dismantling so much of what we came to know and admire about the Star Tribune. We have not bought the hogwash regarding their abiding respect for the Strib’s fertile market. Actions speak louder than words. A vital daily newspaper is still the cornerstone of an engaged citizenry and this cornerstone be shakin’ baby. That said Mr. Rash’s addition to the editorial staff ( please do note this is left hand side writing as the paper’s voice kind of staff) may bring a real world sensibility that full time fourth estaters have been accused of losing.

submitted with awe

MJO

Strange sounds on the car radio as we journey down The Ten from Palm Desert , CA to Prescott, Arizona…. Brit Jockey Mark Wheat’s distinctive voice and sassy patter on public radio emanating from Santa Monica. when did he leave the Twin Cities and MPR? Mark was a first rate waiter back in the day as well, having survived un deux trois and Michael Morse. Restaurants in  Southern California would be well served  by Wheat’s presence, but he seems to be busy enough raising money and playing music for MPR’s much warmer cousin.

Posted whistfully,

CN

Glide Church on the edge of the Tenderloin section of San Francisco serves approximately 500 poor people breakfast, lunch and dinner seven days a week. The food’s good. The service’s efficient, and the enterprise is, it seems, non-proselytizing and non-judgmental. The clientèle is predominantly male and black, from young to old. Other agencies in SF do the same thing every day, and their efforts are replicated across the country. What does all this mean? Is this the so-called permanent underclass of America?

We are mentally and emotionally overwhelmed by the problem. Where have we gone wrong? The poor you will always have with you, someone we know once said. But in these numbers, and growing?

While the Glide Church also offers a raft of other social services, the sense is that this is a permanent,long term, chronic condition. The Haves and the Have-Nots. It’s all very depressing…..

Submitted with a note of sadness

CN

Ahoy,

I would like to extend my heartfelt thanks to the partners at the Starbucks on 22nd and Hennepin for voting me “nicest, coolest, smartest customer ever“. This award, the first of any kind in my life, entitles me to a week’s worth of Triple Grande Non-Fat Lattes, one per glorious day for a whole glorious week. More importantly it entitles me to bragging rights over nice Pat, who is gone to Costa Rica a bit too much to qualify; too cool for words David Fima;, Dr. Gary Stern, the head of the whole Federal Reserve (at least this district); the children’s doctor who looks like the actress Susie Oh, only even classier; half crazy Johnny, the darn pretty good artist; all of the cute ladies from the nail salon; Blois Frigin’ Olson and the life spring guys who never say hi and just stare every morning even though I see them, oh, 336 days a year.
Submitted with swagger
MJO

Ps

just a gentle reminder to the partners at good old 2216 Hennepin, remember to brew full batches of bold until noon each day. Thanks to each of you for the honor!