Opposition to MLK Dog Park Has Deep Roots in Once-Divided City
The park, named in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. after his 1968 assassination, is the focal point of a stark disagreement in the community about whether spending money on a dog park would disrespect the park's legacy.
When Charles Mays, a retired youth director for the NAACP, joined some friends at Park ElderCenter for breakfast last week, talk of the proposed dog park at Martin Luther King Park stirred some memories of times that seem far away to most city residents.
The proposed dog park has led to some contentious Minneapolis park board meetings. Supporters and opponents of the dog park have been depicted simply as pro-dog or anti-dog. But it all started when Mays and other members of the Sabathani chapter of AARP planned to host a picnic at the park last summer.
While planning the picnic, the group heard about the possible dog park, for which some Kingfield residents have been advocating. The group was angry, and they were concerned about children's safety and disposal of dog waste. But their opposition to a dog park at Martin Luther King Park goes even deeper.
"We're not opposed to dogs," Mays said, as he sat at the cafeteria-style table along with Liz Moore, who was born in Des Moines, IA, but who has lived in South Minneapolis for the last 50 years.
In the 1960s and 1970s, it was difficult for black people to buy a house in the area around the park, Mays said. "It would say right on the deed that houses should not be sold to negros," he said.
With the growth of the civil rights movement, the Minneapolis black community received some official acknowledgment of the struggle when the park board renamed the park in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. on Oct. 9, 1968.
"Unfortunately many people living in the area not do not know the history," Mays said. "For us to be able to have the privilege of naming that park Martin Luther King Park—people don't understand."
Before Interstate 35W split the community in two, Mays was living at 41st Street and 2nd Avenue. He's had dogs most of his life—though he can't care for one any more because of his emphysema. He used to walk his dog through the park.
So if he doesn't have a problem with dogs, what is it about a dog park that he deems "a slap in the face to the African-American community?"
Part of it lies in symbolism, he explained. During the Civil Rights movement, dogs were used to attack protesters. During the Children's Crusade in Birmingham, Alabama, Police Commissioner Bull Connor ordered law enforcement to attack children protesters with hoses and German Shephards.
When the group finally visited the park for the picnic, they were stunned at the memorial's condition. "It was a joyous occasion until we saw the weeds growing around the statue," Moore said. "They didn't have a plaque identifying the park."
The disrepair of the memorial only emphasized for the group how out of place it would be for the city to spend money on a dog park.
"The majority of us had grown up around the park, had used the park. We were just very upset that they were even thinking about that," said 81-year-old Doris Christopher. "When I told my children, they couldn't believe it."
Virginia Richardson's late husband Samuel Richardson was president of the NAACP when Martin Luther King Park was renamed. She said her husband joined the NAACP in college and used to walk everywhere because of the segregated buses: "The Civil Rights was his passion."
She feels that there is not enough currently in the park to honor his legacy. "Dr. King has a great legacy in my life," Richardson said. "There was nothing in the park that pointed to the life of Martin Luther King, that the children should know."
Richardson said she has owned pets, including dogs. But her first priority is children and human beings. Even if, as the most recent park board meeting suggested, money is allotted for the MLK memorial as well as the dog park, it might be too late, she said.
"I think if the whole issue had been handled differently, maybe we wouldn't be where we are right now," Richardson said. "I think the way that things were played out left a bad taste in the community."
Jacquelynn Goessling
8:26 am on Thursday, December 16, 2010
Greetings:
I am a Kingfield resident, parent and dog owner. From my perspective, there are two discussions going on here that really have no relation to each other. One is how best to use MLK Park to put forward information regarding the Civil Rights hero and honor his work. The other is how best to use the city's park land to serve the residents of the city.
As a regular attendee of the first round of city dog park meetings, which resulted in the current dog parks, I can tell you that hysteria runs high at these meetings. Talk of children being endangered or "eaten" by dogs is nonsense. Dogs are social animals and, when together, are interested only in each other. While playing they do not seek out people other than their owners, for reassurance, much like a child on a playground. Trash cans are provided at city dog parks for dog waste and dog owners do a pretty good job or letting each other know when there is something to pick up. Nobody wants a dirty dog park.
Dog parks are a place where race, socio-economics and education really have little influence. People come there to exercise their pets and provide them a time to socialize and play with others of their species. These people like dogs and the animals provide the perfect ice breaker in a crowd. The many breeds of dogs playing (mostly) peacefully together is reflected in the mixed backgrounds and races of their owners. Dog parks are wonderful communities.
Jacquelynn Goessling
8:39 am on Thursday, December 16, 2010
That said, I do not think that MLK Park is a good place for a dog park. I believe that the available space is too small, that there is not adequate parking for dog park users with the tennis bubbles and the park clientele already in place and that wedging the dog park in along the freeway wall would ruin the aestehetic of an already-crowded east side of the park.
As for honoring the memory of Dr. Martin Luther King, there is so very much that could be offered. What if the folks at Sabathani worked with the park staff to do more than just remember him on his holiday? What if there were forums at the park on the history of the period? What if there was an opportunity for the neighbors to gather and hear about the experiences of local folks that were on the front lines during the national struggle for Civil Rights Era?
As a white girl at the largely white Page Elementary School in south Minneapolis during the Sixties, we were lucky enough to have an African-American Third Grade teacher -Miss Beale- who told us all about the Civil Rights effort as it was happening. In 1971 I played Rosa Parks, refusing to give up my seat in our school civil rights play. I am lucky enough to have grown up understanding that equality between the races is not just a noble goal, but rather how things should be. I would welcome the opportunity for my children to learn the same thing from their neighborhood elders.
Let me know what I can do to help.
Jonathan K. Lee
4:08 pm on Friday, December 17, 2010
Ms. Goessling:
In response to your above comment, I must take issue with your claim that MLK Park is not a good place for an off-leash area. Your criteria for it not being an appropriate place is that:
1. The proposed area is "too small".
By comparison, the existing off-leash area at Loring Park is less than 1/4 acre. The proposed area at MLK Park is not only nearly four times larger, but well within the parameters for an off-leash area in a Minneapolis park.
2. There is not adequate parking.
Research already conducted indicates that the far and away majority of users of an off-leash facility at MLK Park would come from the residential areas that immediately surround the park, and would choose to walk with their dogs rather than drive. For the less that 2% of potential users who WOULD drive, the limited parking available in the lot is offset by the on-street parking available on 42nd St., Nicollet Ave., and 40th St.
3. "wedging the dog park in along the freeway wall would ruin the aestehetic of an already-crowded east side of the park.
This is patently untrue. Usage counts have already been conducted at MLK Park, and any resident that lives within sight of the proposed area will tell you that the East edge of the park along the soundwall is often deserted. The "crowds" you speak of quite simply do not exist.
Rachel Breen
10:21 pm on Thursday, December 16, 2010
Well written and great perspective Jacquelynn! I love the image of you playing Rosa Parks -- maybe we should "re-stage" that performance at King park! Thanks for your comments here!
Jonathan K. Lee
4:29 pm on Friday, December 17, 2010
I'm sure that the African-American community wouldn't find a "re-staging" of a performance with Rosa Parks played by a white woman in the least bit offensive.
I am African American, and I find the above comment offensive.
Jacquelynn Goessling
1:36 pm on Friday, December 17, 2010
A friend recently pointed out to me that there are already three dog parks in the United States currently named after Dr. King:
Martin Luther King, Jr. Field & Dog Park in Sausalito, CA
Martin Luther King, Jr. Dog Park in Corvallis, OR
Martin Luther King, Jr-West Oakland Dog Park in Oakland, CA
And then there are three more dog parks on streets named for the undeniably great man:
Off Leash Dog area in Golden Gate Park on Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive in San Francisco, CA
Sam Smith Park dog park on Martin Luther King, Jr. Way in Seattle, WA
Thomasville Dog Park on Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive in Thomasville, GA
I wonder if the local communities welcomed or resisted these parks?
Jonathan K. Lee
4:16 pm on Friday, December 17, 2010
Actually, there are more than just these three parks... There are many public recreation areas across the country that bear the name of Martin Luther King Jr. and welcome dogs on the premises.
Generally, allowing dogs in areas that carry the name of MLK Jr. is NOT an issue. For some odd reason, the opposition seems to either not be aware of or chooses to ignore the fact that Coretta Scott King was an animal rights activist until her death, and that his son Dexter Scott King is an outspoken animal rights activist as well.
I wonder what Dexter Scott King would say to the opponents of the proposed off-leash area in the park that bears his father's name? I get the distinct impression that he would take umbrage with persons attempting to use his father's name to impose their will on others.
John Ferman
11:16 pm on Saturday, February 5, 2011
I have not seen all the MPLS dog parks, but the Lake of the Isles dog park has extremely limited parking;; much less than King Field. As for appropriateness of the sound wall area, it is worth remembering that dogs are olfactory creatures and smell is their primary way of communicating. Any area lacking in lots of vertical surfaces as least a nose high would be boring for a dog. In my view any dog park siting should consider the nature of a dog first; we humans with our large brains can cope easily. But the options are few and King Field is better than nothing. Fils should read Alexandra Horowitz's book "Inside A Dog" to learn a lot.