MANSFIELD — Lynn Brinley made it clear to Mansfield City Council on Tuesday night.
The descendants of John Todd are still not in favor of the city granting any easements to land her great-grandfather gave to the city eight decades ago for use as a city park.
“I still am not in (favor) of giving part of the park away,” Brinley said. “I’m just not into it. It’s giving (the North Central Ohio Land Conservancy) control over it. My family is going to have a problem with this.”
Based upon Brinley’s objections and questions — as well as several lawmakers who had questions of their own — council opted to delay a vote on the proposal until at least its next meeting on Nov. 5.
It’s not the first time the proposal has come before City Council. And it’s also not the first time Brinley has opposed the idea.
Mansfield lawmakers unanimously rejected a similar proposal in 2016 after Brinley raised similar objections, citing restrictions Todd placed on the deed in the 1940s when he donated the land to the city.
None of the current eight voting council members were in office in 2016.
“In his deed, he said that it’s to be a city park. And if it’s not going to be a city park, it’s gonna come back to (his) heirs. It says nothing is supposed to stop people from enjoying the park,” Brinley said Tuesday.
Easement would add layer of protection, says Miller
Mansfield attorney Eric Miller, leader of the the North Central Ohio Land Conservancy District, said the easement does not detract from the park’s features, which include a pavilion, basketball court, restrooms and parking lot.
He said it’s only aimed at adding another layer of protection to 14 acres of the 22-acre park down in a ravine that is home to old growth forest (trees approximately 100 years old or older) and spring ephemerals that only bloom briefly each spring.
“Those are flowers that only come up in the spring, have a very short lifespan above ground, even if they’re perennial, they go back underground within two months of sprouting,” he said.
The easement would prohibit timbering or major development in the protected area and could also be expanded through a local developer who would donate additional undeveloped land to the park if council approves the easement.
Miller said John Todd Park, located on the city’s southeast side, has forest and wildflowers unlike any other part in the city.
“It’s a unique feature of (some) areas like Ohio to even have such a thing as spring ephemeral flowers. They’re threatened with extirpation,” he said, describing how “invasive” species would crowd them out of existence without intervention.
“It happens that John Todd Park, in addition to having the best array of old growth trees of any city park, it’s got far and away more spring ephemeral species than any other city park,” Miller said.
“In fact, you can pick your four or five other favorite parks and, and in terms of spring ephemeral species, John Todd Park still would exceed them (combined) in terms of number of species,” he said.
“It’s a unique gem that can be used for teaching inner city kids and the broader community what ancient Ohio used to look like. Places like that are exceedingly rare. Right now, we in the environmental community around here, we’re in a desperate struggle, frankly, to protect, to prevent extirpation, of spring ephemeral flowers,” Miller said.
‘You can’t do it. The deed says no,’ Brinley says
Brinley said her great-grandfather didn’t want to see the park “broken up.”
“(Miller) wants more than half the park. I don’t get how you can look at the deed (restrictions) and go, ‘Oh well, OK, we’ll give it to them.’ You can’t do it. The deed says no,” she said.
“I think it’s wonderful to protect those trees. I don’t have anything against (Miller). I think he does wonderful things. (But) why doesn’t the city just say, ‘We’re going to vote on it and say we will never allow trees in John Todd Park to be logged,'” she said.
“It’s not going to be a city park anymore if you give it to him,” she said. “That (land) is still ours if it’s not a park anymore.”
“I don’t even understand why you’re voting on it. I don’t get it because I’m not a lawyer,” Brinley said.
Lawmakers raise questions during committee meeting
Council members raised questions of their own during a 28-minute parks and recreation committee meeting.
Sixth Ward Councilwoman Deborah Mount, whose ward contains the park, raised the most issues, including the fact the current legislation didn’t include a map clearly showing the easement area, a concern echoed by resident Doug Caldwell, a member of the Hedges Street Neighborhood Watch Association.
She also expressed concerns about a section of the easement that could hinder future improvements to current park amenities, including the existing pavilion and the basketball court, within 50 feet of any old growth tree.
Miller suggested changes in the easement that would prohibit “new” construction, but Mount later successfully pushed for an amendment that removed that entire section of the easement.
“The problem is specifically the improvements,” Mount said. “The neighbors in that area have been begging and hoping for improvements.
“There are old trees near it and I’m concerned whether that will affect the city’s ability to make the improvements that the neighbors in that area want to see,” Mount said.
“I want to make certain that the pavilion and the basketball court there can be upgraded and improved as needed,” she said.
“I want to make sure that we do not bind ourselves from the ability to do that, and I hesitate to even have ‘new’ structures in there, because what if we need to tear down the pavilion and build a new one?” Mount asked.
Third Ward Councilman Rev. El Akuchie asked Miller why the conservancy group was pushing for the easement now. The attorney said the group had sought the easement nearly a decade ago.
“We want to remove invasive species that will eventually wipe out the native species unless someone does the hard work that requires skill to remove the invasives. That’s number one,” Miller said, adding the group has been working on that effort for the past several years and the situation has improved.
“Number two, we want to remove or seek funding, to get junk and construction debris that’s been dumped down the ravine. Get it out of there so this place can be better appreciated. We don’t want to go out and raise the money and do the work simply to enhance the timbering experience of some lumber company,” Miller said.
“We want to be assured that these old growth trees will be protected permanently. Otherwise we don’t want to do all the work and all the fundraising necessary to bring John Todd Park up to its full potential,” he said.
Council opts to give first read, delays vote
Council continued its discussion during caucus with At-large Councilwoman Shari Robertson suggesting a delay in voting on the proposal.
“I think that we’ve heard from people here that actually live in that area and I think it’s important that we take our time and listen to what’s being said,” Robertson said.
“I know Mr. Caldwell expressed his concern about where (the easement area is located). I can tell you I’ve been at neighborhood watches there at Hedges where they have expressed concerns about John Todd Park,” she said.
“I would really like to see some more input and some more talking about this,” Robertson said.
Akuchie agreed.
“It will be important to hear from the people who live around there, those who use that park more. I think I will need to hear some more before I jump into making a conclusion,” Akuchie said.
“I think if we vote tonight or do anything, we’ll be rushing into it without having more input,” he said.
At-large Councilman David Falquette then successfully pushed for an amendment that adds a section to the easement that would give the property back to Todd’s heirs if the city is found to be not conforming to the deed’s restrictions.
He then proposed delaying the vote until at least Nov. 5, which was approved unanimously.
Mount strongly suggested a map be included with the proposal before lawmakers consider it again. She said a map Miller produced during the meeting was insufficient.
“The map provided tonight was not included with the legislation. It is unclear to me exactly what area he means. It’s not delineated clearly. I would like to see it very clearly laid out so that we know exactly what part is going to be included in this easement and what part is not,” Mount said.