Cook County News Herald

Zipping up public input






 

 

I was not surprised that there has been an outcry on the local Internet discussion board “Cook County Conversations”— http:// forums. edemocracy.org/groups/cc—this week about the possible construction of a zip line adjacent to the Gunflint Trail, on the hillside near the pretty green Grand Marais water tower. I’m just surprised that it took so long for the public to get fired up about it.

The Cook County News-Herald ran its first article about the possibility of a zip line being built in Grand Marais back in March. At that time Matt Geretschlaeger, the Cook County – Grand Marais Economic Development Authority (EDA) director, brought forward a proposal to construct a zip line on the western side of Grand Marais, behind the Grand Marais Inn (formerly known as Tomteboda.)

The problems with the proposal at that time were plentiful. Not all of the property was zoned recreational commercial, which would allow the construction of a zip line. Another roadblock to the zip line was the fact that the property in question was situated partly in the city, partly in the county. Geretschlaeger asked the city to annex the property to make the rezoning easier. If it were in the city, only one entity would have to deal with the rezoning question.

Although the Grand Marais Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning, the proposal did not receive a warm reception from the city council, primarily because adjacent property owners did not like the idea of a zip line zipping along the border of their property. The council didn’t deny the request outright, but they made it clear that without support of all the adjacent property owners, they would not vote to rezone the property.

So Geretschlaeger regrouped. At his next appearance before the Grand Marais City Council, on April 11, he said he had found a more suitable location. Geretschlaeger said it was perfectly suited to a zip line—it was zoned properly, had better topography for a zip line, was closer to town, and was in an area of minimal development. The only problem? The land was owned by the city.

Geretschlaeger asked the city to sell the land—part of the Old Ski Hill property— to him for a fair market value. The city agreed unanimously to proceed with an appraisal of the 20 acres in question and to negotiate for sale or lease of the property to Geretschlaeger.

I wasn’t at that city council meeting. Intrepid reporter Bill Neil covers the city beat. But I remember reading Bill’s report of the meeting and being amazed that the city had decided to move ahead without some sort of public hearing. They weren’t doing anything wrong by doing so. In fact, the city’s attorney, Chris Hood, advised them that they did not need to hold a public hearing regarding the sale and appraisal. However Hood said it would be a good idea. I agreed.

I thought we would receive an onslaught of letters to the editor when that story was published on April 21. I thought surely there would be a full house at the next council meeting on April 25. But there was nothing. I was surprised.

I also well remember the lengthy Old Ski Hill Consensus process that took place in 2000. I remember the months of meetings and the presentation of the final plan. Had the members of the Old Ski Hill Consensus group been asked about this proposal? Shouldn’t they be consulted? I think some of them might have been in favor of the proposal. It’s not too far off from the recreational options proposed back then. Snowboarding and tubing and zip line enthusiasts are likely the same demographic.

They weren’t consulted and there was no outcry. Until the matter was pretty much a done deal. This week there is fiery conversation on Community Conversations. I can’t say I blame some of the complainers. Although there were a few newspaper articles about the proposal, the whole project seems to have been fast-tracked—zipped along, as we’ve inserted into three headlines now.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not opposed to a zip line. I actually am in support of it and wrote Mayor Carlson and the city council to tell them why. I think it would be a nice addition to the myriad things to do in Cook County. I think the folks who come to Cook County to mountain bike, to ATV, to rock climb, to see the sights would enjoy also the adventure of a zip line. I think it is one of the most environmentally sensitive developments that could be constructed on the hillside. And although I am skeptical about the number of jobs that could be created, the community could use even a handful of jobs.

However, I do think the public should have had the chance to give input on the sale of public land. We get frustrated here at the News-Herald because we do share information on all the things that are happening—the 1 percent projects, the proposed cell tower up the Trail, the broadband project, etc. and then we hear people say they never heard about it.

In this case, I almost agree. People are busy. They don’t have the time to read every article or attend every city council meeting. An in-your-face announcement of a public hearing would have made this proposal a little less likely to be missed.

Perhaps there is a good reason why this project shouldn’t proceed. Perhaps someone could have brought forward another idea that the council and the community would like better.

Truthfully, I don’t think so. And I hope protesters don’t derail the zip line project at this point. But I also hope that the city council is paying attention to the public outcry. I hope they remember that reaction the next time a decision of this sort needs to be made.

I hope they don’t zip to a decision quite so fast next time. You don’t always win your battles, but it’s good to know you fought.

Marjorie Holmes


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.