Jenn Hathaway, as Director of Communications for the Minnesota Sports
Facilities Authority, you are the perfect person to clarify the facts for us.
Thank you for joining in this public discussion held on E-democracy.org. Since
you are now engaged in public discussion, let us not as you stated, “distort
the facts” and have an open discussion of MSFA’s “significant effort to meet,
respectfully listen and research options.” your words.
As I best recall at our private meeting, our bird advocacy group for the MN
citizens was attempting to suggest any and every possible solution to prevent
the death of migratory birds. Michele Kelm-Helgen was stonewalling and talking
in circles and would not give us specific answers to our inquiries.
First we were told it was a non-issue. MKH said, “There is no evidence birds
will die. If that were true there would be thousands of birds littering the
streets of downtown Mpls.” (sounds like a direct quote from Pioneer Press
columnist Joe Souchery–we know he is a true bird expert?!) This was a difficult
discussion starting point because if you can’t accept there is a problem, based
on the opinion of bird experts, how can we proceed to suggest solutions?
We asked specifically where the glass was in production. After lengthy
questioning, MKH was unwilling to tell us any details. We were only told, “It
is slated to go up in a couple of months, it all has to be made in one batch
and it is too late to make changes to the order.” We asked if MKH had inquired
or would be willing to inquire with the glass manufacturer, Viracon about
adding frits to the glass already produced, which makes it bird-safe and energy
efficient. MKH said, “No as the design is already approved and it is too late
to change the design.”
I then asked if it would be possible to recycle the glass and replace it with
bird-safe glass and MKH said, “that would cost millions of dollars.” Okay, at
least now we were getting some idea of the percent of glass finished. Jenn, in
your e-democracy post you claim this, “YOU specifically suggested that the MSFA
recycle hundreds of thousands of dollars is [sic] glass.” How would I know the
cost of recycling when MSFA hadn’t revealed the amount produced? (Also, you and
MKH need to sit down and go over these dollar amounts. If you’re going to spin
the facts, spin them with consistency.) I then suggested our citizens group
could attempt to raise the money to pay for the new bird-safe glass. There are
citizens who have offered to put in their own money as they understand the
travesty of this glass choice and feel desperate. Then, MKH said, “it is not a
budget issue but a design issue.” Since the Vikings have gotten every design
change approved that they requested, I figured the offer of money might get us
some traction. You posted on E-democracy, “We have told you exactly where the
glass is in production.” MKH stated to the press on Friday, November 21, that
the glass is “deep in production” but did not state that to us at the private
meeting. What does “deep in production” mean?
We asked if MKH would be willing to visit the Jacob Javits Convention Center in
New York City to see the transparency and beauty of a real life example of
fritted, bird-safe glass. This building is a good example of evidence that bird
safe glass prevents bird deaths. It is a perfect case of before and after as it
was revitalized from reflective glass to bird-safe glass. Project Bird Safety
monitored and proved that it reduced bird deaths by 95%. Javits also reduced
its energy costs by 26%. MKH admitted Audubon MN mentioned this as a good “real
life” example during their negotiations but she declined to visit Javits.
Following our private meeting, MKH misrepresented our entire discussion by
publicly stating that “the citizens group asked us to recycle millions of
dollars worth of glass.” Yet in that same public meeting, Wayne Swanson,
co-chair of MN Citizens for the Protection of Migratory Birds, specifically
stated that “no glass needs to be recycled.” Then after all of this
misrepresentation and obfuscation, MKH publicly stated that “we are willing to
meet with the citizens group to find other ways to mitigate this problem.” Hey,
wait a minute, at the private meeting, MKH told us it was a non-issue because
there is no evidence that birds will die. Things are really getting muddled and
confusing now. MKH knows fully well, after 18 months of negotiating with
Audubon, the only way to solve the problem is to change the glass choice. THE
REFLECTIVE GLASS SHE ORDERED IS THE PROBLEM!
Who is distorting the facts here? Who are the publicly appointed officials
mandated to operate with openness and yet are unwilling to reveal the truth?
We demand a public discussion to alleviate this continuous misrepresentation of
private discussions and refusal to reveal the facts. It is very apparent that
MKH is not interested in understanding why there is so much public outcry. She
stonewalled us at the meeting. She spoke in circles.We are told. " Millions of
dollars.Then, hundreds of thousands of dollars. Birds won’t die. Then, let’s
work together to monitor and mitigate the problem. It is a budget issue, Then,
don’t fundraise money as it is not a budget issue, it is aesthetics. It is too
late to change the design once approved." The next day the Vikings proposed
more than $600,000 in design changes and got them rubberstamped by the MSFA.
MSFA did not negotiate with Audubon in good faith and did not perform due
diligence before placing this order. Everyone has a right to his or her own
opinion Jenn, but not their own facts. MSFA did not work to find a solution.
They did work hard to find one word used at the private meeting–“recycle”–take
it out of context, add a dollar amount and put this out to the media, trying to
make the citizens group look like the fiscally irresponsible party.
MSFA hid from the press its privately expressed opinion that birds are not in
danger and that the stadium does not lie in the Mississippi Migratory Flyway.
MSFA did not mention our presentation on the Javits Center and didn’t bring up
our suggestion to add frits to the remaining glass not yet produced. At the
MSFA public meeting we presented these solutions yet again and the media did
not give us any coverage.
MKH and the board have chosen not to represent MN citizens, our children and
our future in this choice of glass. This choice is not based on the core values
of Minnesotans. They have chosen to side with the Vikings–money and power and
rah-rah! hoopla.
We hold Governor Dayton equally responsible for this decision. He is trying to
hide behind MKH and the MSFA board and not weigh in. He has refused to meet
with Audubon MN and refuses to meet with us. After he received 100,000 petition
signatures, thousands of phone calls/emails from angry citizens seeking bird
safe glass and a letter calling for her removal as chair, he chose to commend
MKH for “doing an outstanding job.” This represents his vote for an anti-bird,
anti-energy efficient, anti-environmental choice. This is his decision to
ignore the choice of MN citizens. This is his legacy–thousands of dead bird
carcasses and continued public outrage for years to come. The citizens are
still mystified as to why MKH, the MSFA board and the governor–our public
officials–are choosing to take all this heat to defend this no-brainer choice.
Who is really running this show? Certainly not our elected and appointed public
officials who are charged with serving the interests of the citizens of
Minnesota.
This is not a complex issue. It is about someone’s perception that fritted
bird-safe, energy efficient glass is not as aesthetic as the highly reflective
glass. Someone who never toured a fritted glass building. Someone who does not
care a hoot about declining bird populations, increasing our carbon footprint
or the legacy we leave our children. Someone with enough power “money” that
they think they run the show and can ignore a few bird lovers. They
underestimated people’s growing awareness of the environmental catastrophe
looming on the horizon. These are new times. We can no longer afford to do
“business as usual.”
In this instance, when a building used for the entertainment of a few and the
massive profiting of the grossly rich, a building which is very heavily funded
by the taxpayers but still completely disregards the city council resolutions,
disregards the MN sustainable building law, disregards migratory bird
protection laws, numerous conservation groups, and the will of the people … we
are in big trouble. Speaking truth to power is difficult. Especially when the
media are more than willing to simply reprint PR from the MSFA than provide
fair and balanced reporting. What a travesty! If the “people” can’t win this
one, after all the money we have sunk into the “People’s Stadium,” there truly
is no
hope.