Gerry Broderick

Milwaukee County’s park system is often called “world class.” Our incomparable lakefront boasts miles of distinctive green spaces. Ten sites, including Lake Park, are on the National Register of Historic Places. Frederick Law Olmsted, Central Park’s creator, designed three parks and Newberry Boulevard. Our parks and parkways have long been a source of local pride, even as some of their glory fades with reduced funding.

Now, our enviable parks system is in grave danger of being dismantled by Milwaukee County’s administration. A seven-page survey mailed to 4,000 randomly selected households proposes actions to “reduce the size of the Milwaukee County park system to match current available funding.” It asks which parts of the well-crafted parks network could be abandoned (horticultural facilities, golf courses, pools, pavilions, neighborhood parks, senior centers and so on).

Those proposed extreme tactics were tucked amid benign questions about parks usage. I believe this survey pits park users against each other and is based on flawed premises and misrepresentations. The survey also elicits opinions on financing options.

Questions about downsizing are prefaced with a doomsday scenario: “The annual budget for Milwaukee County cannot cover all the needs of the Parks system.” It’s followed by a tough ultimatum: Which of the park system’s cherished offspring might you be most willing to sacrifice?

With no prior discourse about specific funding methods, respondents are asked to “vote” for how to fund the parks, whether through parking meters in lakefront parks, a wheel tax, higher user fees, more partnerships with businesses and sponsors, or a sales tax. The latter was approved through a referendum in 2008 but never enacted by the state Legislature. That section’s sketchy introduction includes inaccurate and misleading statements about deferred maintenance and the county’s budgetary restrictions.

A memorandum of understanding with PROS Consulting Inc. of Indianapolis, called for a “needs analysis survey” to inform parks planning. It did not authorize seeking opinions about complex financing schemes or shrinking the parks system.

Survey questions about “programming, parks, trails and open space development needs” likely will provide useful information for long-term planning. However, I believe misguided questions about parks downsizing and financing will yield data of no value.

The consultant’s contract, signed also by Milwaukee County and the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, stated “Prior to the survey being administered, it will be reviewed by staff, the county executive and the Board of County Supervisors.” County officials have confirmed that questions were never reviewed by the board or individual supervisors. Significant survey defects may have resulted from this contract breach — since board review also would have allowed for public comment.

The lack of public process is especially egregious since the contract says survey results must be incorporated into the parks department’s 10-year master plan, and into SEWRPC’s “Year 2050 Parks and Open Space Plan for Milwaukee County.” That could have serious implications for decades.

I believe this survey is an effort to gather data to justify privatization, sale and abandonment of our public parks and facilities. Milwaukee County’s parks belong to all of us, and citizens should rightfully demand an inclusive public conversation about their future. Parks are not “businesses” and must not be cavalierly spun off or sold like divisions of a corporation. Parks all have a purpose — the greater good — regardless of how much revenue they generate.

I support thoughtful, sound planning about how to best preserve, protect and manage our “necklace of green” — Charles Whitnall’s poetic term when he masterplanned our parks system. I propose the following so that research and planning is meaningful, equitable and grounded in best practices.

■An online parks survey is planned for this fall. I urge parks officials not to solicit opinions about closing, downsizing or transferring parks and facilities.

■Data from the random survey about parks funding and dismantling the system also should be deemed invalid for long-term planning. It does not address “needs analysis.”

■Park-usage questions should be posed so responses are not inappropriately skewed. Rather than asking whether “you or any member of your household have a need” for specific facilities, ask whether specific amenities are “valued” as part of a well-balanced parks system.

■If we need to discuss as a community how to continue stewarding our priceless parks, let’s do it through public discourse and neutral education and outreach, significantly guided by citizen involvement.

■We urge media professionals to explore issues relating to parks, which are so essential to our metro area’s quality of life and economic viability.

■People throughout the county must be able to fully participate in discussions about our parks, not only invitees to focus groups.

We also encourage all county residents to evaluate the role that specific parks play in their lives — and to commit to supporting their continued presence. There are 50-some parks friends groups, and more could be formed. Proposals to close neighborhood parks or facilities likely will target those without vocal champions. We also urge citizens to rally on behalf of all our parks — to serve everyone equally. That’s what pioneers Charles Whitnall and Frederick Law Olmsted did. We’re all luckier for their far-sightedness and commitment to parks being a force — and platform — for democracy.

Gerry Broderick is a board member of Preserve Our Parks and the retired chairman of the Milwaukee County Board’s Parks, Energy and Environment Committee.