probably anticipated
-- cameras nearly outnumbered the people testifying
for or against dog parks during the public comment period.
But Stackhaus, seated next to Parks
Board President John Fierro, made no secret of where her affections lay.
When a dog park opponent got up to speak, Stackhaus smiled and nodded approvingly.
When WOOF supporters took their turns at the lectern, Stackhaus busied herself by scribbling notes, puffing out her cheeks with audible sighs, exchanging meaningful glances with Fierro and aiming tortured expressions at the audience. Stackhaus comes with her own closed captioning. She is the parks board's Marcel Marceau.
In response to questions from Fierro and Commissioner Meghan Badwey Conger about the cost of installing dog parks, Solomon said that advocacy groups around the country had proven successful at raising their own funds. Even in a recession, people find money to spend on their pets, Solomon noted. He explained that a dog park needs only a few simple things: a fence with double gates, a shady area, access to water, waste receptacles and adequate parking.
People want dog parks near their homes "in concert with the walkable-city concept," Solomon said. The task force's conclusion that dog parks belong near neighborhoods is at odds with the board's 2007 policy, a hastily written rule that barred off-leash areas from being constructed anywhere besides the city's largest regional parks. (That 2007 policy was put on hold pending the task force's recommendations.)
The parking issue has long been a point of contention between WOOF's advocates, dog park opponents and the parks board. At today's meeting, Sonya Carter told the board that she represented "hundreds of people" in the Waldo neighborhood who own dogs but oppose the idea of an off-leash park at Sunnyside. Carter complained that the park suffers from a lack of parking because of a multitude of activities that take place there. But according to the report, such concerns were not convincing to the task force.
Solomon asked that the board identify parks that they approve for off-leash dog areas as quickly as possible so that advocacy groups like WOOF could begin raising money. Two dog parks should be opened by the end of 2009 to meet the public's demand. Solomon asked that the board appoint a Parks and Recreation staff person to act as a "dog park liaison" for the department, and to please keep the task force members in the loop.
After the meeting, Parks and Recreation Director Mark McHenry said he expects the board and parks staff to take 30 days to review the task force's report before issuing their reactions. He advised that interested parties keep a close eye on upcoming commissioners' meeting agendas starting around August 18.
Then again, we could just listen for the whooshing sounds emitted from Stackhaus' energetic eyebrows.
Showing 1-12 of 12
I applaud the Parks Board for making a wise choice in the selection of several of the City's parks to add dogpark areas to, but more specifically I say they deserve a well earned pat on the back for not choosing the controversial Sunnyside Park. The Board by not selecting one of the Dog Park Task Force's(which it should be said was a very non-objective and heavily biased group)top choice for a dogpark, Sunnyside Park, showed the City and it's citizens that it could not and would not be bullied into a poor decision. You have made the right decision!!!
Sunnyside Park was the wrong choice for so very many reasons, it is too small, it is too close to a heavily travelled thoroughfare, it already contains too many activity areas to include a walking trail, basketball courts, several ballfields, a children's playground and sprayground, several tennis courts as well as several picnic areas. Those neighbors surrounding the park and a majority of residents in the immediate area were not receptive to the idea, nor were businesses around the park onboard with it either. Let us not forget the bad behavior exhibited by those in favor of the idea namely many WOOF members and their leader Deb Hipp, who advocated harassment of the Boardmembers and also used a deceptive campaign for the idea and often used downright untrue and/or derogatory language about those opposed to her and her group's ideas about the park.
Why are we letting the rest of the board off the hook? They did nothing to stop Aggie's behavior, and never have done anything to try to rein her in. To say nothing is complicit. Isn't it Board President John Fierro's responsibility to keep this board in order? Looks like Aggie's got him by the tennis balls.
Does Aggie Stackhaus not hold her position on the KC Parks Board as an honor and privilege? Her behavior was so unprofessional at Tuesday's Parks Board meeting, I was utterly shocked. She was too busy shaking her head, rolling her eyes, grimacing, and interupting (while her colleagues were actually listening to the speakers in order to make an INFORMED decision,)to actually hear what the proponents of dog parks were saying. She made it very obvious with her brazenly inappropriate behavior that her mind is made up against dog parks. She has put up a wall against any new information or ideas that have been presented to the board. It truly frightens me that a woman like her is making decisions about our parks. It is people like her who keep our city in the dark ages!
We may be frustrated and disappointed (again) by the delay tactics of the commissioners regarding KC dog parks but it has made us fight even harder. No more hearings are needed; we have already had at least 6. John Fierro earlier admitted that "we have heard all we need to hear" in a KC Star article dated 9-11-2007. Besides it's now like the boy who cried wolf. We go to a public hearing and they disallow any comment as happened Aug. 28, 2007. We finally have gained enough political savvy to know that this is just another in a long list of delay tactics designed to keep us waiting until the commissioners' term is over. How stupid are they?
You think it's hard getting a dog park? Try getting a biscuit around this place!
I'll never get a trip to a dog park, all I get is wine spilled on my head on a lousy walk around the block.
Rrrrrroooowwww. You think it's bad facing down Aggie at a meeting, try being her dog!
You give Aggie too much credit. It is Mark McHenry who pulla her strings, as he has done with former board members. His wife, when approached to sign a petition in favor of the Sunnyside proposal, made clear her vehement opposition. Pillow talk or not, he's got his wife and faithful follower Aggie singing his song.
As someone who was present during the hearing, let me make a couple of comments.
The board did not vote on the issue because they are studying the report for 30 days and then making their recommendations.
Aggie Stackhaus' demeanor throughout the discussion was unprofessional and dismissive. It was every bit as "expressive" as the story describes. She made it clear that no amount of study would sway her position and that she has an unwavering "NIMB" mindset (Not In My Backyard). I was frankly embarassed to think that she holds a position of authority in our community.
I am appalled that our mayor appointed this woman to such an important position. If this is how she acts in public, with TV cameras trained on her, imagine how she must be in private, when she and her fellow commissioners go scuttling off -- bellies rubbing the ground and rodent-like whiskers quivering with delight -- to a back room to scheme against grassroots activists trying to better their city. What an embarrassment to Kansas City this whole board is. Shame on the parks board. Try serving the citizens instead of yourselves.
Thank you! It's about time someone called Aggie Stackhaus on her ridiculous, passive-aggressive tantrums. Yeah, it's hilarious, in a pathetic sort of way, but someone who's supposed to be a public official has no business acting this way toward members of the public - even if she disagrees with them.
Seems like Aggie and Co haven't decided to roll over on this issue just yet. What surprises me is that I didn't see any mention of regulations or minimum standards for the type of facility to be built or the requirements for ongoing maintenance. The devil may still be in the details...
Oh, and where was the Funk on this?
It does seem however that the pro dog crowd got a better reception than they got last time out ( a year or so ago) from the Parks Board and from the town hall meeting they had with Mayor Funk A Dunk.
like
dislike
