About 40 people gathered the evening of May 19, 2009 to discuss the two options that distill the Grand Marais Park Board’s efforts over the last several months to develop a long-range plan for the tourist park. City council, park board, and community members sipped coffee and ate cookies by the lighted hearth of the log 4-H building while consultant Bob Bruce described how the two options incorporate many of the ideas that have been generated throughout the community, as well as how they compromise on ideas that conflict. As the meeting progressed, thunder, lightning, and rain descended outside while a storm inside the building brought the meeting to an end.
The park board is still hoping for input as it works toward finalizing its master plan, but the two options have some things in common that indicate they are likely to be included in the new plan. According to Bruce, the park will remain a source of revenue for the city and will continue to provide lodging for visitors.
One of the major changes would be to replace the softball field with full-service sites to meet a growing trend toward RV camping. While the current park has about 300 campsites that reach a 90% occupancy rate only about three weeks a year, RV campers are turned away throughout the summer because RV accommodations are full. Park Director Dave Tersteeg said the average occupancy rate, including the slow months, is less than 50%.
Another common element in both options would be to locate marina parking where the municipal pool sits, with the assumption that any new pool in the future would be located on Community Center property. Both options also include a lounge for campers and boaters in the park office building and an events pavilion that could accommodate catered sit-down dinners for up to 200 people.
Major distinguishing factors in Option 1 are that trailers in the northeast corner (below the highway by North House) are replaced by green space, the events pavilion is incorporated with the park office in a 9,000-square-foot building in the general area of the current park office,and the DNR boat landing is moved from the southwest to the northwest corner of the harbor (assuming a new breakwall would enclose that area). It leaves the southeast corner of the park a natural area and has an estimated 254 sites. This option would keep public events closer to the downtown area, Bruce said.
Option 2 leaves the DNR boat launch where it is and places the events pavilion in the general vicinity of the former power plant, with a paved parking lot between them. Option 2 also leaves sites for trailers in the northeast corner and increases campground sites to an estimated 323.
The master plan, being developed as a result of a grant, is a 25-year plan and no funding has been allocated for any of the changes.
Bob Bruce said the park board tried to find space for many activities in the recreation area. Theyhave tried to keep a lot of natural area around the lake and hope the local community will regularly use the park.
Bob Glirbas, a Grand Marais resident and former park employee, stated that seasonal users would not look favorably on the removal of campsites from the northeast corner. Bruce responded by saying that postcards asking for comments were mailed to every registered park user.
Some in attendance favored removal of all sites east of 8th Avenue. John Gorsky stated that rec park revenue could come not only from campsites but also from events that would generate dollars and bring visitors to the area. Bruce said the park board is trying to weigh the financial ramifications of green space vs. campsite space. “I don’t think the park board is willing to entertain a ‘loss leader,'” he said.
George Wilkes said he believes a larger park space in the northeast corner and a natural area with restored wetlands in the southeast corner would add an amenity to Grand Marais that would attract more tourists, especially “eco-tourists” who are looking for environmentally friendly vacation amenities. Regarding the lowland in the southeast corner, he said, “We could call it the ‘grand marais’ of Grand Marais.” (“Grand marais” means big marsh in French.)
Richard Olson said he thinks drawbacks of Option 2 include having to drive through the campground to reach events in the pavilion, having the pavilion where summer temperatures would be coldest, and incurring extra costs related to maintaining a pavilion separate from the park office. He referred to the park as an RV park, at which point park board chair Lindsay Mielke objected, saying it is not an RV park. She told Olson he needed to get his facts straight.
Harley Tofte said he thinks the harbor already has plenty of green space and favors Option 2, which would give events at the pavilion more privacy. He didn’t think a boat ramp would work in the northwest corner of the harbor without a new breakwall. Bruce replied by saying that while the committee cannot address harbor issues, they assume a new breakwall would be built if the boat ramp were moved.
Bette McDonnell supported removal of trailers from the lakeshore, saying a lot of people in the community would like to walk along the shore through the park but feel uncomfortable walking past campsites where people are living. Jan Sivertson said that developing the lake walk in Duluth made the harbor “come alive” with activity. Linda Otis, who owns property east of Grand Marais but also stays in the rec park, said campers enjoy seeing people walk by.
John Gorski stated that while they don’t know if the pool will go away, if a new breakwall will be built, or if money will be there for development of new campsites, it seemed to him that Bob Bruce favored Option 1 which would require all of those things to happen. He stated that it seemed to him that Bruce was pointing out mostly advantages of Option 1 and disadvantages of Option 2.
If you wait until you know what will happen, Bruce replied, you might as well not plan until years down the road. He said he had done what was outlined in his contract for consulting services and considered Gorski’s remarks a personal attack. He said he thought the park board should speak up.
“Lindsay, I think it’s time that you chaired the meeting,” Bruce said.
With that, he walked to a corner of the room while Mielke stood up, fielded a few more comments, and adjourned the meeting.
Anyone who would like to see the two alternative designs can review them online at the Grand Marais Recreation Park website www.GrandMaraisRecreationArea. com. Click on Master Plan at the bottom of the page. To submit comments on the proposals, e-mail recpark@boreal.org or call the Park Office for information at (218) 387-1712. our community.”
The Lashinski family founded the Grand Marais GM/Chevrolet franchise in March 1996, adding the auto dealership to the business it already operated, Steve’s Sports. That business began in 1991 offering Yamaha, Husqvarna, and Auto Value auto parts. In 1995, a Bombardier franchise was added. The business now employs nine people full-time and one part-time worker. Gene Lashinski said he hopes that employees will not be impacted.
Gene Lashinski recalled that it was difficultto become a GM dealer. “They wanted us to be exclusively a GM dealer—they didn’t want us to have our other franchises,” he said.
Gene’s wife, Karen Lashinski, added, “It was a huge investment. We added a 10,000-square foot service facility.”
Grand Marais Motors has been a successful franchise, at least in terms of customer service for GM, Chevrolet, Buick, Cadillac, and Pontiac. Grand Marais Motors is considered a small dealer in terms of unit sales, but it has consistently had excellent consumer satisfaction scores on purchase, delivery, and service.
Sales would be drastically impacted with the loss of GM dealer status, because new vehicles and autos from GM auctions, which provide low-mileage rental and lease cars, would not be available. “We’ll most likely continue with sales though,” said Gene Lashinski. “We’ve gained a bit of knowledge of cars in the 13 years we’ve been doing this.”
Asked if they would consider trying to obtain a different dealership, Gene Lashinski said it was unlikely that any other manufacturer would consider opening in Cook County, especially in the current economic climate. Despite the recent news, Jason Lashinski is still loyal to GM. “I’d have a tough time selling something other than Chevy. I still think it’s the best product out there.”
The family’s biggest concern is the impact on service to its customers. If the dealership was lost, Grand Marais Motors mechanics could perform maintenance on GM vehicles, as they do now for other makes and models. But warranty work must be done at a GM dealer, which means a drive—or tow—over 100 miles away. In addition to being inconvenient, this negatively affects local government and emergency services. Grand Marais Motors provides warranty service work for numerous vehicles in the county and sheriff department, state patrol and US Border Patrol fleets.
“What we don’t understand is how this will help the company reduce costs or be more competitive,” said Karen Lashinski. “It costs GM nothing to have us here. We pay for every sign, computer, special tool, and training.”
Scott Lambert, executive director of the Minnesota Auto Dealers Association (MADA) agreed. “That is absolutely true. Auto dealerships are a cost-free distribution system. Grand Marais Motors owns the property, the building, they pay for delivery. They paid for the sign on the building!”
Lambert said Grand Marais Motors is one of 138 GM dealer franchises in the state. It is one of 28 that have received letters of nonrenewal. Asked if rural dealerships were hit harder, Lambert said that is not the case. “We are seeing a mix—some metro area and some rural. We can’t really see a pattern—this is one of our criticisms of the process. We don’t know what the critiera is for these non-renewals.”
Gene Lashinski said, “They are not considering how this is impacting small towns the most.” He hopes GM will change its mind and will continue its presence in Cook County. He noted that for years the Chevrolet slogan has been “Heartbeat of America.” He said he hopes that GM will remember that small communities like Grand Marais are the heartbeat of America.
Lambert said, “What Grand Marais Motors needs to do is convince GM that closing the Grand Marais dealership will harm its business. Frankly, GM executives and the Washington decision makers don’t care about Grand Marais Motors. We have to convince them that closing the dealership will hurt their bottom line.”
Lambert said MADA is encouraging its dealers to contact members of Congress to seek help in keeping GM dealerships.
Letters of support for a continued GM presence in Grand Marais can be mailed to General Motors Corporation, PO Box 33170, Detroit, MI 48232-5170. The Lashinski family asks that copies also be brought to them to include in the documentation they are submitting. GM has requested that information be submitted by June 1.
“We are not going anywhere,” said Gene Lashinski. “We are committed to Grand Marais and this community. We will continue to provide service to our customers whether we are General Motors dealers or not. We would like to take this opportunity to thank those who support us. If you feel that Grand Marais deserves a Chevrolet dealer, please consider contacting GM to tell them that.”
Leave a Reply