Additional Grant Could Pay For High School Baseball Field Lights

The Richfield School Board passed a resolution approving the grant application Oct. 15.

Ron Clark Releases Statement on Failed Pillsbury Commons Project

The developer said that while there is "no shortage of legal claims," he will not take action against the city.

The final blow to the proposed Pillsbury Commons development project came after the option agreement between the City of Richfield and developer Ron Clark expired June 30, 2012. Following the contract expiration, Clark did attempt to reinstate it, however, the city stood firm. Richfield Patch contacted the developer for comment on the failure of the project. Clark released the following statement to Patch through his attorney, Jim Susag, Thursday afternoon: Ron Clark Construction & Design (“Ron Clark”) began working with the City of Richfield and the HRA in 2009 on a potential development of the Pillsbury Avenue site (“Pillsbury Commons”).  After preliminary direction from the City Council, Ron Clark and the HRA entered into a Preliminary …

•  4 Comments
• Photos (1)

QUOTES: Community Weighs In at Richfield School Board Special Session

The public was allowed to comment on the field lights project prior to board discussion and voting. Here’s what people had to say.

A handful of community members lined the sidewalk leading to the Richfield Public Schools District Office Thursday night, bearing signs in opposition of the recently approved field lights project. The board met for a special session to discuss the project after e-mails, phone calls and snail mail letters—both for and against the lights—hit board members since their June 11 decision to approve the project. However, the board ended in a 3-3 vote Thursday, upholding its original decision. The board allowed the public to comment prior to making its decision, bringing mostly opponents of the project to the microphone. However, the main focus—regardless of feelings about the lights—appeared to be getting the next referendum passed this fall. …

•  3 Comments
• Photos (1)

Council Refuses to Reconsider Recent Pillsbury Commons Actions

The developer’s attorney asserted the council violated some of its own rules.

The final pleas of the hopeful Pillsbury Commons developer, Ron Clark Construction & Design, fell on deaf Richfield City Council ears Tuesday night. The council struck down the developer’s request for reconsideration of the June 12 decision to reject the purchase offer for two pieces of city-owned land. The developer holds an option to purchase the former city garage site, which the city is obligated to sell. However, without the additional pieces of land to aid in meeting housing density requirements, the proposal was effectively killed that night. Following suit, the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) also denied the sale of a third parcel June 18, among other things. In a formal letter requesting the council’s …

•  6 Comments
• Photos (1)
• Documents (1)

UPDATED: Richfield School Board Calls Special Session To Revisit Lights Decision

The special session will take place at 7 p.m. Thursday night.

Last Update: 2 p.m. on June 26, 2012 After the Richfield School Board voted 4-2 to approve funding the installation of lights on the high school baseball field June 11, it has now been called to a special session on Thursday to reconsider the project and decision. The decision proved to be quite controversial, with many community members—both for and against the project—e-mailing and calling board members over the past two weeks. Those speaking out on Richfield Patch were mostly in opposition to the project, however, there were a few champions as well. The project takes $200,000 of rents from the newly revamped turf field to pay for the lights over the next seven years. In order to call a special session, the board chair (Sandy Belkengren…

•  8 Comments
• Photos (31)

Caitlin Burgess

3:37 pm on Wednesday, June 27, 2012

I think John Ashmead's decision to go forward with a special session was definitely a move that took public feelings into consideration. While he may not change his mind on the issue once all is said and done, agreeing to discuss it again shows a lot in my opinion. I do however understand that it is frustrating that this meeting is a board discussion, rather than a public forum. As I stated above…   more ›

How Do You Define These Controversial Words?

Ideology shapes how we interpret language. Share what these words mean to you.

Patch wouldn’t be what it is without its comment threads. These threads spin off in directions Patch editors never imagined. Users add new information, new opinions, even new issues that go far beyond what the author wrote. And yet comments can also create confusion and frustration. It’s not just that people have different opinions; it’s that these opinions shape how they use and interpret language. Although dictionaries can help, words carry baggage that’s not mentioned in Merriam-Webster. The end result can be two sides talking past each other. That’s why Patch wants to know how you interpret some key vocabulary of these debates. We’ve collected a handful of choice words that pop up in our online discussions regularly. In the comments …

•  3 Comments
• Photos (1)

Community Members Upset Over District's Decision to Install Field Lights

Tell us what you think about this issue by taking the poll below and sharing your thoughts in the comments section.

Wth word spreading throughout the city of the Richfield School Board's decision to install lights on the high school baseball field, community members are piping up on Patch. The light installation is part of the district's plans to revamp the field. In late 2011, Hennepin Country awarded roughly $275,000 to the school for the  revamp project. Earlier in the year the board felt it didn't have sufficient funds to include lights in the project, however, after discovering rents for the new turf field would be nearly double than expected, a majority (4-2) voted in favor of using those rents to fund the lights. The pricetag for the lights is roughly $200,000. However, the $200,000 is not coming from the district's capital fund, which is used …

•  41 Comments
• Photos (1)

Pillsbury Commons Further Marred By City Officials’ Decisions

The Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority rejected three additional actions in regards to the affordable housing project Monday night.

After the Richfield City Council refused to sell two city-owned parcels of land to Ron Clark Construction & Design last week, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) further maimed the Pillsbury Commons project by rejecting three other items Monday night. The commission held a public hearing regarding the sale former Gleason mortuary parcel, considered a contract for private development and resolution adopting the tax increment financing and modifying the area’s redevelopment plan. All were struck down in unanimous votes. ‘Local Voices Heard’ In a final effort, Ron Clark attorney Jim Susag made a plea for all three items to be tabled, announcing the developer had submitted a letter to the city asking that the council reconsider last …

•  8 Comments
• Documents (1)

UPDATED: Nollenberger Says School Board Chose Field Lights Over Funding Classrooms

A majority of school board members voted to install lights with a $200,000 price tag on the high school baseball field.

Last Update: 10:45 a.m. on June 25, 2012 After a resolution was killed in late Spring 2012, the Richfield School Board revisited installing lights as part of the high school baseball field revamp project last week. In a 4-2 vote, the board passed the measure, allocating $200,000 more to the project, using rental dollars from the new turf field as funding. Board members Todd Nollenberger and John Easterwood were against the measure. Nollenberger told Richfield Patch that installing lights was fiscally irresponsible, noting that class sizes are increasing next year, layoff notices were just sent to some teachers and, simply, night games are rarely played. “We try to prioritize capital projects,” he said. “And there is a long list of things …

•  44 Comments
• Photos (3)

tim pollis

1:41 pm on Tuesday, June 26, 2012

Dan, The revenue is general and can be spent on ANYTHING. The budget was set and subsequently cut down in February, before lights were discussed. Choosing to spend it on lights instead of items that were cut in February (or anything else) is choosing lights over all those other possible areas: asst coaches, teachers, paper, you name it. This isn't complicated. I wouldn't say it is specifically "…   more ›

LIVE: House Debates, Votes on Vikings Stadium

How will Richfield's representatives vote? Watch it live here.

After months and even years of debates and discussion regarding a new Minnesota Vikings stadium, it all comes down to this. The Minnesota House of Representatives debate and then vote on the Vikings stadium issue on Monday. Richfield Patch will have live video via The UpTake. The plan going to the floor is the same plan that's been voted down in committee, resurrected, spliced, reshaped, and then finally re-born as the same package that was discussed a month ago. The bill calls for $427 million from Vikings, $150 million from Minneapolis, $398 million from state via expansion of charitable gambling, to build the stadium. Watch the proceedings live in the video windown above.

•  3 Comments
• Photos (1)

Caitlin Burgess

4:51 pm on Monday, May 7, 2012

Of course!   more ›