For those who may be viewing this as a TL:DR kind of article. I'll give a brief summary:
On April 4th, 2022 I was "fired" as a volunteer steward at the Jarvis Migratory Bird Sanctuary by the Chicago Park District.
Was this for any type of malfeasance, complaint or other misbehavior? No.
After 24 years as one of the original organizers and founding stewards of what became the Jarvis Migratory Bird Sanctuary volunteers (then called the "Addison Street Bird Sanctuary"), I was terminated from this UNPAID position because of "policy". I will no longer be working at Jarvis. At some point in the near future, this web site will be taken down.
The long version begins here.
Let's establish that a "written agreement" is a "contract." Has anyone ever signed a contract? Do you sign without reading it? Do you sign if you don't agree with the terms of the contract? Rhetorical questions, of course.
To quote from the "Lead Steward Volunteer Agreement:"
I ____ have read the Community Stewardship Policy Guide, agree to abide by the guidelines, and now enter into a commitment to help support our designated Natural Area in ____ Park
Seems simple enough, right? But in fact it is a contract, with the terms contained in the Community Stewardship Policy Guide. Quoting from an August 26, 2021 email from Matthew Freer of the CPD to Vera Rast and me:
Please review the attached guide for these policies and expectations, as well as roles and responsibilities for volunteer stewards.
So of course I did just that. I'll next discuss the reasons why I don't agree with this "Policy Guide".
Right from the start, with the cover illustration, you can see that the program's orientation is toward children. Children as workday volunteers? Makes no sense to me, but obviously it does to the Environmental Conservation & Engagement Department of the Chicago Park District.
To quote from the introduction:
In 2001, inspired by the actions of engaged community members, the Chicago Park District launched the Community Stewardship program to support and recruit volunteers to aid in habitat restoration and community engagement.
Guess who the "engaged community members" were? Jim MacDonald at Gompers Park, Charlotte Newfeld and me at Jarvis, and the volunteers we had recruited. Jim had started the Gompers Park group before us, but by 2001 we had been working at Jarvis for over 3 years.
Also from the introduction:
We appreciate the dedicated spirit that you bring to the Natural Areas.
Quite a nice marketing slogan. The reality, shown by their actions, is that they really could care less.
On to the body of the contract.
Most of the "Community Stewardship in the Parks" section is rather innocuous, but a few items deserve mentioning. "Community Stewards ... must adhere to Chicago Park District policies and procedures." Sure, but just what are their "policies and procedures?"
Inclusiveness: Each site in the Stewardship Program must have a transparent process for welcoming interested volunteers. As a public agency, the Park District values inclusiveness; anyone interested in volunteering is to be fairly considered.
Really, what does THAT mean? Anyone over 18 who wants to come and work at Jarvis has to meet just 3 requirements. Be physically fit enough to do some work, dress for it, and show up! Where does CPD get this garbage from? Because they apparently have this on their web site, we've been getting inquiries from people about what they have to do to volunteer. Good grief! It always used to be "just show up." But if you're not dressed for it, you won't be able to do any work, or maybe only do work that doesn't expose your bare skin to damage. Do they think we discriminate against people because of their race, ethnicity, or religion, or that we have secret rituals or haze new volunteers? Or is it just that we must have some kind of bureaucratic process for doing so? Conversely, does this mean we can tell people to just go away?
OK, maybe that's it. This is laying the groundwork for upending the policy we've had at Jarvis for many years: no one under 18 is permitted unless accompanied by a responsible adult. We'll see soon why this is important to the CPD.
The next one is just plain annoying and shows how little CPD cares about bothering to follow through with it's own mandate.
Workdays: The Lead Steward is responsible for scheduling workdays at the start of each year. A minimum of four workdays per year is expected. The schedule must be submitted to the Program Manager for approval, and will be shared with the public on the Chicago Park District website.
Wake up, CPD. Even at the beginning, before the "Community Stewardship program" existed, we were doing at least 12, every month of the year and through all four seasons. By 2004 that number had become closer to 20, and we have been doing a minimum of 24 workdays a year for many years now. We publish workday dates on OUR web site and post them at 2 places at Jarvis itself. However, the CPD thinks stewardship is "seasonal."
Since the beginning of the year, people have been telling us that they'd like to volunteer on an upcoming SUNDAY, when in fact all of our regularly scheduled wordays are on SATURDAY. Why? That's because the CPD wouldn't publish our 2022 dates at the beginning of the year, because it wasn't volunteer stewardship "season"! Of course, this begs the questions, who exactly is the "Program Manager" (we've never seen anyone who has that title), and why must they be approved? Are we going to be told we do TOO MUCH WORK?
Organized groups (schools, corporate groups, etcetera [sic]) interested in participating in a workday must be approved in advance by the Program Manager. Plans for marketing materials such as banners, brochures or giveaways should be included in the request for approval.
So now we're the CPD's marketing department, along with being their baby sitting service (more on that shortly). Sorry, we've NEVER provided banners, brochures and giveaways, except for coffee, which we've been providing - at no cost to the District - since our inception. You might think that the CPD would expect us to provide THEIR "marketing materials" to volunteers, but no - they expect us to provide our own. On top of it, they now want to "approve" "organized groups" that want to volunteer. So we're supposed to turn away organized groups of volunteers that they don't approve of? So much for that "Inclusiveness" paragraph. WE can't exclude anybody but the CPD can.
Of course, thinking about this, it would be very easy to ignore. Just tell the group to come as "individuals." No approval neccessary, and much more "inclusive."
Workdays include hands-on opportunities in ecological restoration, monitoring, education and cleanup. Basic tasks include but are not limited to trail maintenance, planting, pruning, controlling invasive plant species, seed collection, trash pick-up and nature walks.
So now the District is telling us what to do. Of course, considering that we're working in a "natural area," we avoid "pruning."
First, our policy is not to do any pruning inside the fenced areas unless absolutely necessary - for instance, to provide sunlight to a small recentty planted oak tree, or for safety reasons. It's supposed to be a natural area, not a manicured park.
Second, we have never done "nature walks." Our policy has ALWAYS been that no one enters the fenced in areas except to work.
Third, we're not "environmental educators." If that's supposed to be provided at workdays, then the CPD should send "environmental educators" to come out to workdays. Of course that brings up the question, educate whom? Seems like more of a push to design workdays for children.
Fourth: "trail maintenance." The "trails" used by the public are outside the fenced areas where we do 99% of our work. We're not going to start "maintaining" the gravel paths when we neither have the tools nor material to do so. But do you think the CPD can even maintain the gravel path to the handicapped ramp at the observation platform? The few times we've asked them to do so had resulted in long waits while the path becomes more and more deteriorated. So this sounds like a bad joke.
Onward to the section of "Volunteer Positions."
Lead or Assistant Stewards must be at least 18 years old and commit to a minimum of 2 years of service to the Group. The Lead Steward serves as the primary point of contact with CPD staff, and is responsible for overall coordination of workdays. Lead and Assistant Stewards must complete a Chicago Park District Volunteer Application and clear a background check before beginning service.
First, why do I need to commit to a minimum of 2 years to the group after I've been doing it for 24 years? The CPD obviously doesn't believe I've been "committed" to this project long enough. This is insulting, but if it was only that, I could live with it. After all, if I left next year, what could they do? Sue me for not fulfilling my contract? I'd like to see the Park District do that to anyone.
Second, anyone can do a "background check" on anyone else without their permission. Background check services are all over the internet. However, this is where the Chicago Park District assumes if you're volunteering for one of these roles, you must be either a pedophile or some other kind of criminal, or insane, and therefore a menace to society. Their "background check" includes getting a mug shot and fingerprints taken, for the ongoing "crime" of being a volunteer steward. I've spent well over a year's worth of full time work - well over 2000 hours - at Jarvis in the past 24 years (not including travel time), and I'm not a criminal. In fact, once again, I was cleared by the Secret Service to work at an event where the President was appearing - the IBEW Convention at McCormick Place. I've had SS clearance since before I started volunteering for the Park District. So I'm assuming the CPD must consider me (potentially) insane. Their presumption of guilt until proven innocent makes me question why I've spent such a big part of my life doing this, and whether it's been a complete waste of time.
Qualifications:
Possess a desire to learn, a strong interest in the management of the Natural Areas, strong leadership and communication skills, and the ability to work collaboratively with diverse populations.
Obviously, the "diverse populations" part includes pre-school children. See photo above.
Our experience with children at workdays has been limited, but the one time (many years ago) that Charlotte and I agreed to host a high school group on a workday was a waste of our - and our volunteers - time and energy.
The 2 adults who showed up with about forty 14 and 15 year olds pretty much disappeared during the time they were there, didn't do ANY work at all, and didn't supervise the students work. Even though we repeatedly emphasized that proper dress was essential, apparently their teachers didn't, and a large percentage of the students came dressed in sandals and shorts, which meant they couldn't do any work because they would be liable to injure their bare legs and feet. Let me add that this was LONG before the CPD (and Nature Conservancy) instituted their "liability waiver." Because almost of of the regular volunteers had to spend their time monitoring these kids so that they wouldn't inadvertently step on recent plantings or otherwise damage native plants, or supervise the few that were actually working, the total amount of work accomplished that day could have been easily done by the smaller number of regular volunteers without the students. Yet of course all the students got credit fo "community service."
After that experience, we instituted a policy of our own at Jarvis: no one under 18 was permitted at a workday unless accompanied by a responsible adult. There never was an under-18 group again after that.
Occasionally, we would still get a few minors who would come out with their parents to fulfill some "community service" requirement of their schools. It was generally a "photo op" to prove they were there and did something, but most left after an hour or so, and little work (or damage) was done. Having to monitor and "lead" these children has alway been a distraction from the real work we did, however. I don't think we ever saw any of them again.
The over 18 groups - from universities, corporations, and clubs - have been an ENTIRELY different story. In fact, groups from Loyola and DePaul have made big contributions, as have most of the other adult groups. Our last group from Loyola Law School was amazing in how much they were able to get accomplished. These are the groups the District wants us to create "marketing materials" for, and yet to have veto power over.
For the rest of the "qualification", I think my work over the past 24 years has demonstrated I have all of those qualifications, although the current bureaucracy at the CPD has no knowledge of what Charlotte and I (and now Vera, currently the official "Lead Steward" at Jarvis, I'm presuming) through the years have accomplished.
Next:
Previous experience in natural areas management or volunteering is preferred, but not mandatory.
Wow. Not mandatory. You can be a "Lead Steward" and not have a clue about what to do. What other stewardship program does that? I'd like to know.
Completion of one season as an Apprentice Steward (candidates with prior stewardship experience may be deemed exempt).
So I "may be deemed exempt?" But I have to agree that I may NOT be deemed exempt and therefore need to serve as an "apprentice" for "one season." Yet they can appoint ANYONE ELSE as steward with NO experience. Of course this part of the contract contradicts itself. And they had their legal staff review this language? Hmmm...
Willingness to participate in supplemental trainings as recommended by CPD staff.
So far, the "trainings" they have offered have had nothing to do with natural areas management. Instead, they've been focused on "sensitivity" training. For the paid work that I do, I have to complete a required course in anti-harassment training every year, which I suspect is a lot more comprehensive than what the park district has been offering.
Responsibilities:
Work with CPD to schedule volunteer workdays and manage site volunteers. Stewards are expected to coordinate and lead at least four workdays per year.
Brought to you by your CPD "Department of Redundancy Department." [Credit: The Firesign Theater] See discussion above of the "Workdays" paragraph.
Share observations of space use, community attitudes, and the health of plant and wildlife communities for use in CPD site management plans.
So the "health of plant and wildlife communities" is the least important of the three, which is why it's mentioned last. Doesn't sound like anyone who has any experience is natural area restoration or management wrote that.
We at Jarvis promulgated a management plan very early on. The second revision was published here on the web site for years. Whatever the CPD's management plan is, I doubt very strongly that it's been informed by any of our long term goals and short term priorites. I doubt that anyone from CPD has spent any time there recently. We did have one meeting in 2021, after the incredible storm damage of August 2020, that destroyed more than 30 trees and left a gaping hole in the main fence. That hole was not repaired for the better part of a year, even though CPD was notified immediately. At that meeting, we made a request that was only partially fulfilled. We asked for 6 oak trees be delivered to us for planting in one of the affected areas. Instead, we found 6 oak trees planted by contractors, not where we wanted, and 3 of which were planted in areas where we knew they wouldn't survive! After we moved them to areas where they WOULD survive (as they are doing right now), we were chastised by the CPD because that voided their warrantee. The rest of the request (seeds) was never fulfilled.
I could write much more about this issue, but suffice it to say this is only one of many we've had since 2019.
Further, about the "positions:"
Community Steward – Greeter
I won't belabor this but it's not one we ever had, ever wanted, or ever needed. But gee, if CPD wants to assign anyone to this role, which includes NOT DOING ANY RESTORATION WORK, so be it!
Community Steward – Apprentice
Community Steward Apprentices must be at least 16 years old and commit to one year of service to the Group. Apprentice under the age of 18 must have parental consent. Community Steward Apprentices must complete a Chicago Park District Volunteer Application
Notice that our policy has been that no one under the age of 18 participates without a responsible adult supervising. But I'm expected to agree to someome the CPD wants to assume this role based on a "Volunteer Application." The current steward(s) have no say in the matter. And the best part is that person doesn't need to go through the "background check!"
This position also illustrates the reasoning behind the Chicago Park District wanting mug shots and fingerprints, because stewards are expected to be the newest "babysitters" for the CPD. Of course, we're included in the same group as Little League coaches and other volunteers who are there to specifically work with children. The only possible reason for this is that the CPD wants to be able to force its stewards into these roles, whether they want to be doing this or not.
Volunteer – Nature Ambassador
Nature Ambassadors must be at least 18 years old. Nature Ambassadors must complete a Chicago Park District Volunteer Application before beginning service.
Again, the CPD can just anoint someone as the "Nature Ambassador" to "offer nature walks or other nature based learning opportunities as part of workdays in the Natural Areas". Our policy is that people enter the fenced areas ONLY TO WORK. But that's not what the CPD wants. They'd rather have people wandering around Jarvis doing "nature based learning" (whatever that means) rather than contributing to the enhancement of the habitat. In fact, if they happen to accidentally trample some sensitive plants, oh well.
Workday Volunteer
From paragraph 1:
Youth volunteers age 13 or over must be accompanied by a parent on their first visit. Volunteers under the age of 13 must always be accompanied by a parent or guardian.
From paragraph 2:
People under the age of 18 must be accompanied by a parent or guardian to the first workday, and cannot participate without a signature from the parent or guardian.
Notice the contradiction? So which is it? I think you can bet it will be paragraph 2, not 1.
I've gone through all of this because the Guidelines are the set-up to force stewards to work with unaccompanied chidren and teens under the age of 18, i.e., become de facto babysitters. That's the most important part. I refer back to the photo on the front of the "Stewardship Guidelines." The focus of the CPD has obviously shifted to "Environmental Engagement" and away from "Environmental Conservation," and they think that children are their main audience.
On top of all of this, I don't believe the Chicago Park District can be trusted with this kind of personally identifiable information. I can only think that next they'll be asking for DNA samples, because that info they can turn around and sell and make some extra money. When Charlotte was active, she objected to these requirements for all the reasons I've already stated, plus her history of being spied on the the Chicago Police Department's "Red Squad" while she was working as an activist and organizer. I agreed with her then, that the city couldn't be trusted with this information. I don't know how anyone can be comfortable, in this age of rampant identity theft, with giving an agency like the Park District this information when it's not really necessary. That the Park District is making this a requirement shows that they expect their natural area stewards to work with unaccompanied children, whether the stewards want to or not.
That's the reason the Park District got rid of me. Sure, I could still volunteer and just work there, but I'd be expected to function the same way I've been doing it for the last 24 years. But as far as the CPD is concerned, I'd have no standing to have any say in what goes on at Jarvis. I feel that they're negating the work that I've done, and ultimately being a volunteer with the Chicago Park District has been a waste of my time. I don't want to waste any more.