By Cathy Abene and Charles Rucker
Dear Constituents,
We are writing to update you on the two resolutions related to parkway closures originally scheduled for the Park Board’s January 7, 2026, meeting. These items were pulled by their author, President Tom Olsen, due to the tragic events that day, including the killing of Renee Good by a federal agent. We extend our deepest sympathies to the whole community. We are aware that President Olsen intends to reintroduce both parkway resolutions at the Planning Committee meeting on January 21, 2026, and so we need to send the following update at this time.
Who We Are
We are Charles Rucker and Cathy Abene, the commissioners representing North and Southwest Minneapolis respectively. We served during the Park Board’s last term, and we were recently re-elected to represent our districts. Not only do we have a deep understanding of past attempts to remove and close parkways, we are informed by the work we do in our day jobs. Specifically, Charles is a firefighter and Cathy is a civil engineer. We apologize for the length of this email, but we know how important transparent communication on this topic is to our constituents.
Recap of the January 7 Process
The resolutions—one for an “open parkways pilot” that explores closing parkways and another to remove roadway segments from The Mall Park—were submitted late as agenda amendments without standard background materials or clear specifics. A directive by the board president indicated routing them through committee to a full board vote the same evening, raising concerns about rushed review and limited public input.
What We Have Learned
Based on subsequent communications from President Olsen and others, the “open parkways pilot” targets West River Parkway near downtown for installation of permanent barriers like gate arms to restrict vehicle access, making it easy to block access from North Minneapolis.
The Mall Park resolution aims to revisit long-range plan elements, including removing roadway sections and eliminating emergency and fire access for several blocks of pre-war apartment buildings—changes paused last year amid strong community opposition, especially from renters living in those buildings.
What We Have Heard from You
Thank you to everyone who emailed OpenTime@minneapolisparks.org, contacted commissioners, or attended the meeting on the 7th. Hundreds of comments poured in, and we’ve reviewed them all. A significant majority expressed opposition to the proposals, citing transparency issues, accessibility challenges for seniors and people with disabilities, inclusion concerns, emergency response impacts, and connectivity disruptions. We heard that limiting access for Northsiders would be modern-day redlining and discrimination. While occasional event closures were supported, permanent barriers and roadway removals were not.
Next Steps
Expect these resolutions to appear on the January 21 Planning Committee agenda (posted January 15; subscribe at agendasuite.org/iip/mprb). If approved, they’d go to a full board vote on February 4.
To engage for January 21 (5:00 p.m., Park Board Headquarters, 2117 West River Road):
- Most Effective: Attend Open Time in Person – Starts ~5:30 p.m.; 1-minute limit. Sign up: 612-230-6400 by 3:00 p.m. or in person.
- Submit Written Comments: Email OpenTime@minneapolisparks.orgby noon January 21.
- Email Commissioners:
In Conclusion
We believe the Park Board is committed to removing barriers and prioritizes equitable access for all. We should avoid advancing projects without broad community support and ensure decisions do not create unnecessary barriers or harm—such as restricting emergency access or limiting connectivity. The original intent of the Minneapolis Grand Rounds parkway system, as envisioned by landscape architect H.W.S. Cleveland in 1883, was to create an interconnected network of parks and parkways that would provide equitable access to natural beauty and recreation for all residents, linking every section of the city regardless of neighborhood or demographics. This egalitarian design ensured that public green spaces remained a shared resource, fostering connectivity and well-being across diverse communities.
Thank you for your involvement in our parks.
My any means necessary, eh Mr Olson?
It shocks me that Tom Olsen would put forward such a plan when many in our community are afraid to leave their homes and will not be able to provide public input on this issue at these meetings.